﻿
<hansard noNamespaceSchemaLocation="../../hansard.xsd" version="2.2">
  <session.header>
    <date>2024-02-26</date>
    <parliament.no>2</parliament.no>
    <session.no>1</session.no>
    <period.no>0</period.no>
    <chamber>House of Reps</chamber>
    <page.no>0</page.no>
    <proof>1</proof>
  </session.header>
  <chamber.xscript>
    <business.start>
      <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:WX="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
        <p class="HPS-SODJobDate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-SODJobDate">
            <span style="font-weight:bold;" />
            <a href="Chamber" type="">Monday, 26 February 2024</a>
          </span>
        </p>
        <p class="HPS-Normal" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-Normal">
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">The SPEAKER (</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">Hon.</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">
            </span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">Milton Dick</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">) </span>took the chair at 10:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.</span>
        </p>
      </body>
    </business.start>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>COMMITTEES</title>
        <page.no>1</page.no>
        <type>COMMITTEES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Petitions Committee</title>
          <page.no>1</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report</title>
            <page.no>1</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEMPLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>181810</name.id>
    <electorate>Macquarie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present the 21st report of the Petitions Committee for the 47th Parliament.</para>
<para class="italic"><inline font-style="italic">The report read as follows—</inline></para>
<quote><para class="block">HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">PETITIONS COMMITTEE</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">REPORT No. 21</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Petitions and Ministerial Responses</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">26 February 2024</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Chair Ms Susan Templeman MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Deputy Chair Mr Ross Vasta MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Mr Sam Birrell MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Ms Alison Byrnes MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Ms Lisa Chesters MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Mr Garth Hamilton MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Ms Tracey Roberts MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Ms Meryl Swanson MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">This committee is supported by staff of the Department of the House of Representatives</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Report summarising the petitions and ministerial responses being presented.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The committee met in private session in the 47th Parliament on 18 January 2024, 7 February 2024 and 14 February 2024.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">1. The committee resolved to present the following 65 petitions in accordance with standing order 207:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">Petitions certified on 18 January 2024</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 51 petitioners—requesting the removal of any discrimination against autistic drivers in the Assessing Fitness to Drive guidelines (EN5709)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting the development of a nuclear fusion industry in Australia (EN5712)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 13 petitioners—requesting that the Prime Minister be removed from office (EN5714)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting that unions pay tax (EN5717)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—regarding the Medicare levy (EN5718)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting the development of a nuclear fusion industry in Australia (EN5719)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting the development of a nuclear fusion industry in Australia (EN5720)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting the introduction of a code of conduct for parliamentarians (EN5722)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 10 petitioners—requesting the cessation of any subsidies for renewable energy or electric vehicles (EN5727)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—regarding ADSL availability for non-wireless communications (EN5729)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 45 petitioners—regarding the use of cash as legal tender (EN5730)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting the development of a nuclear fusion industry in Australia (EN5731)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6 petitioners—regarding the funding of public broadcasters (EN5741)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 16 petitioners—requesting annual auditing of all government departments (EN5743)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 13 petitioners—regarding recyclable and biodegradable packaging (EN5746)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 7 petitioners—requesting the negotiation of a new US-Australian security treaty (EN5748)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 99 petitioners—requesting that proposed Digital ID legislation be rejected (EN5749)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 105 petitioners—regarding processing times for Partner visa (subclass 309) applications in Amman, Jordan (EN5750)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 99 petitioners—requesting that proposed Digital ID legislation be rejected (EN5751)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting that the House condemn Hamas and its supporters (EN5754)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 86 petitioners—requesting that the House condemn the killing of children in Gaza (EN5756)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—regarding vendor finance options (EN5765)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 306 petitioners—requesting jobs in the Victorian High Country be included as specified work for 'Working Holiday Maker' visas (EN5767)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4988 petitioners—regarding changes to the Temporary Graduate visa (subclass 485) (EN5768)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting products containing tea tree oil to be labelled as dangerous to small animals (EN5769)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting the development of a nuclear fusion industry in Australia (EN5770)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 777 petitioners—requesting Australian citizens be prevented from serving in the Israel Defense Forces (EN5771)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 15 petitioners—requesting limits on the production of single use plastics (EN5772)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 55 petitioners—requesting the establishment of a Veterans' Advocacy Code of Conduct (EN5773)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 808 petitioners—requesting exemptions to proposed changes to age limits for Temporary Graduate visa (subclass 485) applicants who are current or commencing students (EN5774)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 12 petitioners—requesting support for Israel (EN5776)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 36 petitioners—requesting eligibility requirements be reduced for Permanent Residence (Skilled Regional) visa (subclass 191) applications (EN5777)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 38 petitioners—requesting the implementation of a four-day work week (EN5778)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 22 petitioners—requesting that Australia commit to defend Taiwan in the event of an invasion (EN5779)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 15 petitioners—requesting a halt on Australian passport fee increases (EN5780)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting the creation of more Commonwealth Supported Places in medical courses (EN5781)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 967 petitioners—requesting an inquiry into the involvement of Australian citizens in IDF operations (EN5783)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 461 petitioners—regarding fee discrepancies between individual financial advisers and AFSL holders in relation to the ASIC Supervisory Cost Recovery Levy (EN5784)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 11 petitioners—requesting increased protections for victims of family and domestic violence (EN5785)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 23 petitioners—requesting that cannabidiol be included on the PBS for the treatment of chronic pain (EN5789)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 586 petitioners—requesting the reconsideration of proposed changes to age limits for Temporary Graduate visa (subclass 485) applicants (EN5790)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 68 petitioners—requesting humanitarian visas and support for Palestinians fleeing conflict in Gaza (EN5793)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 19 petitioners—requesting the implementation of the Finnish housing policy model (Housing First) in Australia (EN5804)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 54 petitioners—regarding concerns about a cashless Australia (EN5808)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 31 petitioners—requesting a review of ADF recruitment restrictions around coeliac disease (EN5816)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting the development of a nuclear fusion industry in Australia (EN5822)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting the development of a nuclear fusion industry in Australia (EN5823)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—regarding receipts for goods and services being issued to customers (EN5826)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 73 petitioners—requesting a review into the way in which HECS loans are repaid (EN5829)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 44 petitioners—requesting that the ABC be defunded (EN5830)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 250 petitioners—requesting an inquiry into communications from DFAT and the consular support provided to Australian citizens and residents who have family members in Gaza (EN5832)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 8 petitioners—requesting that the House consider repeating the referendum on the Indigenous Voice to Parliament (EN5833)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 56 petitioners—requesting the rejection of the World Health Organisation's new amendments to the International Health Regulations (EN5836)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1466 petitioners—regarding processing times for Business Innovation and Investment (Provisional) visa (subclass 188) applications (EN5837)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1409 petitioners—requesting that Australia cease funding to UNRWA (EN5838)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 16 petitioners—requesting the option for appointments with employment providers to be conducted via telephone (EN5842)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 27 petitioners—requesting the development of a high-speed rail network to link all Australian capital cities (EN5843)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—regarding Australian Disability Enterprise employment conditions (EN5845)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 189 petitioners—requesting that the Australian Government suspend sanctions against Syria (EN5846)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5089 petitioners—requesting consular support for Palestinians evacuating Gaza and expanding access to visas (EN5847)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3716 petitioners—regarding the outcomes of the NDIS Review (EN5849)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 550 petitioners—requesting the removal of the GST on exercise physiology services (EN5850)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 11 petitioners—requesting that testing done for the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia is only done by NATA accredited laboratories (EN5852)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 125 petitioners—regarding transparency of information sharing for the Medicines Advice and Therapeutics Education Services (MATES) program (EN5853)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 183 petitioners—regarding consent from veterans of information sharing for the Medicines Advice and Therapeutics Education Services (MATES) program (EN5854)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">2. The following 7 ministerial responses to petitions were received.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">Ministerial responses received by the Committee on 14 February 2024</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs to a petition regarding Overseas Visitors Health Cover (EN4202)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Assistant Treasurer to a petition regarding ticket reselling company Viagogo (EN4350)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Assistant Treasurer to a petition requesting that the ACCC be added to the terms of reference of the 'Inquiry into ASIC's capacity and capability to respond to reports of alleged misconduct' (EN5423)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Assistant Treasurer to a petition requesting that legislation be introduced requiring all imported retail goods to be labelled with their Co2 equivalent emissions (EN5428)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for Finance to a petition regarding privacy concerns around the Australian Government's Digital ID program (EN5485)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for Defence to a petition requesting that Australia's Force Posture Agreement with the United States be terminated (EN5543)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme to a petition regarding doctors being responsible for NDIS medical forms (EN5550)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Ms Susan Templeman MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Chair—Petitions Committee</para></quote>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PETITIONS</title>
        <page.no>3</page.no>
        <type>PETITIONS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Presentation</title>
          <page.no>3</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEMPLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>181810</name.id>
    <electorate>Macquarie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present the following 65 petitions:</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Road Safety</title>
          <page.no>3</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Nuclear Energy</title>
          <page.no>3</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Prime Minister</title>
          <page.no>3</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Trade Unions</title>
          <page.no>4</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Medicare</title>
          <page.no>4</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Nuclear Energy</title>
          <page.no>4</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Nuclear Energy</title>
          <page.no>4</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Parliamentary Standards</title>
          <page.no>5</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Renewable Energy</title>
          <page.no>5</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Telecommunications</title>
          <page.no>5</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Banking and Financial Services</title>
          <page.no>5</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Nuclear Energy</title>
          <page.no>6</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Public Broadcasting</title>
          <page.no>6</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Public Sector Governance</title>
          <page.no>6</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Waste Management and Recycling</title>
          <page.no>6</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>International Relations: Australia and the United States of America</title>
          <page.no>6</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Personal Information and Privacy</title>
          <page.no>7</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Migration</title>
          <page.no>7</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Personal Information and Privacy</title>
          <page.no>7</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East</title>
          <page.no>7</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East</title>
          <page.no>7</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Banking and Financial Services</title>
          <page.no>8</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Working Holiday Maker Program</title>
          <page.no>8</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>International Students</title>
          <page.no>8</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Animal Welfare</title>
          <page.no>8</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Nuclear Energy</title>
          <page.no>8</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East</title>
          <page.no>9</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Waste Management and Recycling</title>
          <page.no>9</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Veterans</title>
          <page.no>9</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>International Students</title>
          <page.no>10</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Israel</title>
          <page.no>10</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Skilled Migration Program</title>
          <page.no>10</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Work-Life Balance</title>
          <page.no>10</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Regional Security</title>
          <page.no>10</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Passport Office</title>
          <page.no>11</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Universities</title>
          <page.no>11</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East</title>
          <page.no>11</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Banking and Financial Services</title>
          <page.no>11</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Domestic and Family Violence</title>
          <page.no>12</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme</title>
          <page.no>12</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>International Students</title>
          <page.no>12</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Refugee and Humanitarian Program: Gaza</title>
          <page.no>12</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Homelessness</title>
          <page.no>13</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Banking and Financial Services</title>
          <page.no>13</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Defence Recruitment</title>
          <page.no>13</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Nuclear Energy</title>
          <page.no>13</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Nuclear Energy</title>
          <page.no>14</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Banking and Financial Services</title>
          <page.no>14</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Universities</title>
          <page.no>14</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Public Broadcasting</title>
          <page.no>14</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Refugee and Humanitarian Program: Gaza</title>
          <page.no>14</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Constitution: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice</title>
          <page.no>15</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>World Health Organization</title>
          <page.no>15</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Migration: Business Innovation</title>
          <page.no>15</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>International Development Assistance</title>
          <page.no>16</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Pensions and Benefits</title>
          <page.no>16</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Rail Industry</title>
          <page.no>16</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Supported Employment Services</title>
          <page.no>16</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Syria</title>
          <page.no>16</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Refugee and Humanitarian Program: Gaza</title>
          <page.no>17</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Disability Insurance Scheme</title>
          <page.no>17</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Health Care: Goods and Services Tax</title>
          <page.no>17</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Family Law</title>
          <page.no>17</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Veterans: Personal Information and Privacy</title>
          <page.no>18</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Veterans: Personal Information and Privacy</title>
          <page.no>18</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PETITIONS</title>
        <page.no>18</page.no>
        <type>PETITIONS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Responses</title>
          <page.no>18</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEMPLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>181810</name.id>
    <electorate>Macquarie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present the following seven ministerial responses to petitions previously presented:</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Private Health Insurance: Overseas Visitor Health Cover</title>
          <page.no>18</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Consumer Rights: Ticketed Events</title>
          <page.no>19</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Competition and Consumer Commission</title>
          <page.no>20</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Climate Change</title>
          <page.no>20</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Personal Information and Privacy</title>
          <page.no>21</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>US-Australia Force Posture Agreement</title>
          <page.no>21</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Disability Insurance Scheme</title>
          <page.no>21</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PETITIONS</title>
        <page.no>22</page.no>
        <type>PETITIONS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Statements</title>
          <page.no>22</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEMPLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>181810</name.id>
    <electorate>Macquarie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Topics among this week's batch of petitions include migration matters, aspects of the conflict in the Middle East, and the National Disability Insurance Scheme.</para>
<para>The committee continues to work to inform potential petitioners about the requirements for petitions. As members know, the committee must rule out of order any petition requests that don't adhere to the standing orders.</para>
<para>I've spoken before about the use of moderate language, and that people must only sign a petition once. Today I'd like to remind Australians thinking of starting a petition that it must contain a request. This should be expressed clearly, to make it easy for others to understand. In addition, each petition must give a reason for the request.</para>
<para>The request must refer to a matter on which the House can act. That means a petition is usually about something for which the federal government is responsible, and not about something that is the responsibility of a state or territory government or a local council. For example, a petition relating to rubbish collection in someone's town or city is a local council matter, and many aspects of public transport are matters for state or territory governments.</para>
<para>The committee can see that some people put a great deal of thought into proposing a petition, but it just needs to be directed to the jurisdiction responsible for the specific matter of concern.</para>
<para>I look forward to updating the House further on the work of the Petitions Committee.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>22</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Accountability of Grants, Investment Mandates and Use of Public Resources Amendment (End Pork Barrelling) Bill 2024</title>
          <page.no>22</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7153" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Accountability of Grants, Investment Mandates and Use of Public Resources Amendment (End Pork Barrelling) Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>First Reading</title>
            <page.no>22</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>22</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr HAINES</name>
    <name.id>282335</name.id>
    <electorate>Indi</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a second time.</para></quote>
<para>I am proud to introduce the Accountability of Grants, Investment Mandates and Use of Public Resources Amendment (End Pork Barrelling) Bill today.</para>
<para>Just for a moment, imagine that we're coming up to an election—not that hard to picture! The major parties start making their case to voters, especially the voters in marginal seats. They promise to spend taxpayer money to build a hospital, a sports park perhaps, or maybe a new bridge. Perhaps they promise $900 million for a rail line upgrade.</para>
<para>Now imagine you're a voter. You may not be in a marginal seat. But your community desperately needs better hospitals, roads and train lines, just like the marginal seats. You watch as the major parties commit millions to seats they need to win. They don't visit your electorate, let alone make any funding announcements. You end up feeling like your community has been ignored year after year. You feel like your vote doesn't matter.</para>
<para>Members of the major parties in this place may say promises to spend taxpayer money in marginal seats are common practice, a fact of political life. One well-known politician has said, 'I don't think it would be a surprise to anybody that we throw money at seats to keep them.' Another politician has said this practice 'is a feature of Australian democracy'. But we cannot accept this as a feature. It is a flaw in our democracy.</para>
<para>Using public money to target certain voters for political gain—known as pork-barrelling—is at best poor administration and at worst corruption.</para>
<para>Let's be clear—we're talking about thousands of grants and billions of dollars each year.</para>
<para>Promises are made for infrastructure in 'must win' or 'gettable' seats at the expense of projects with equal or more merit and better value, thus wasting public money.</para>
<para>But it's not just wasting money.</para>
<para>Pork-barrelling undermines public trust in governments and in politicians who are elected to make decisions on our collective behalf, in the public's interest and for the common good. It undermines our trust in democracy.</para>
<para>It perpetuates a cynicism in the community that giving your vote is about 'getting stuff' rather than getting good policy.</para>
<para>According to the Australia Institute, more than 80 per cent of Australians view pork-barrelling as a form of corruption.</para>
<para>Contrary to what many politicians say, voters don't like it and they don't want it.</para>
<para>The problem is perfectly demonstrated through one of the most notorious examples of pork- barrelling—the Community Sport Infrastructure program, known as 'sports rorts'. Under this $100 million program, the Australian National Audit Office, or the ANAO, found that, amongst other things, the minister decided to assess grant applicants separate from Sports Australia, who was responsible for administering the grants. They did not award grants assessed by Sports Australia as the most meritorious.</para>
<para>Again, let's be clear.</para>
<para>Pork-barrelling is not just a problem on one side of politics.</para>
<para>Yes, we have nine years worth of material from the coalition about problems with grants programs that they delivered—egregious problems.</para>
<para>But I have concerns about the current Labor government's administration of the first rounds of the Community Batteries for Household Solar program and the Mobile Black Spot Program, which were by 'invitation only' to deliver election promises.</para>
<para>Now, as we approach the next election, let's see if this government make the integrity grade as they direct funding and make promises to voters.</para>
<para>In the meantime, it's blatantly obvious there is a problem, the problem is pork-barrelling and we must create laws to stop it.</para>
<para>My bill does just this. It increases fairness, accountability and transparency in spending public money, most commonly via grant programs.</para>
<para>Firstly, the bill requires all grants programs to have clear and publicly available, merit based selection criteria and guidelines.</para>
<para>Secondly, the bill ensures robust reporting to the parliament about what grants are awarded, to whom and why. This includes requirements for ministers to report to parliament in a timely manner when they've gone against the official advice from government departments about who is best placed to receive a grant.</para>
<para>Third, the bill creates a new Joint Parliamentary Committee on Grants Administration and Investment Mandates. This committee will oversee grants administration, including compliance with guidelines.</para>
<para>Fourth, this bill requires the minister to report to parliament about whether or not investment mandates are being complied with. These are the ministerial directions for how the billions of dollars in funds—including the Housing Australia Future Fund, for example—should be invested and distributed.</para>
<para>This bill is not radical.</para>
<para>It does not take away the discretion of ministers to award grants—something that can be especially important in times of emergencies like floods or fires.</para>
<para>This bill does not stop parties making election commitments to spend money if they win government.</para>
<para>But what this bill does do is set out a simple and practical framework for ensuring that when a minister makes a 'captains call', or when a major party delivers on an election commitment, it's done so transparently, fairly and responsibly.</para>
<para>Thanks to CPI</para>
<para>I want to thank the Centre for Public Integrity—especially Dr Catherine Williams, Geoffrey Watson SC and Dr Gabrielle Appleby—for working with me on this bill.</para>
<para>This bill has the support from some of the most experienced, respected legal minds in this country.</para>
<para>So now I call on all members in this place—from all political parties—to back me in these reforms. Don't turn a blind eye or a deaf ear to my efforts to end pork-barrelling just because it's something that everyone does. We—as elected members to this place—should and could be so much better than that.</para>
<para>The government will tell you they're fixing the problem—they intend to implement recent recommendations on grants administration by the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit.</para>
<para>But these recommendations don't go nearly far enough. They only strengthen guidelines, not legislation, and they don't give parliament the oversight powers that we need.</para>
<para>Their recommendations lack teeth.</para>
<para>It's not going to be members of the major parties that drive reform to end pork-barrelling. Of that, I'm sure. That's why, as an Independent, I'm coming forward with this solution to clean up this practice.</para>
<para>I'll shortly meet with the Minister for Finance, Senator Gallagher, who introduced her own bill when in opposition which would require additional reporting requirements on ministers awarding grants, just like my bill.</para>
<para>And I hope to work closely with her so we can achieve the reforms set out in my bill together.</para>
<para>Conclusion</para>
<para>The latest global corruption rankings—the Corruption Perceptions Index—ranks Australia at 14th place in the world. Even after we've legislated the National Anti-Corruption Commission and started reforming whistleblower protections, Australia is still in the same place we were a year ago, and still woefully behind where we were a decade ago.</para>
<para>We are at the crossroads with reinstating the Australian public's trust in government and in parliament.</para>
<para>We must listen to the insistent call of the Australian public to do better—to end jobs for mates, to put truth back in political advertising, to get dirty money out of politics and to shine a light on who has access to this parliament.</para>
<para>And we must end pork-barrelling. It is another critical pillar to restoring public trust in government, and in our democracy.</para>
<para>I cede the remaining time that I have left to the member for Kooyong.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr RYAN</name>
    <name.id>297660</name.id>
    <electorate>Kooyong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion. I would like to present you with a list of some of the great pork barrels of recent Australian political history: the Great Barrier Reef Foundation, $443 million; the Safer Communities Fund, $184 million; sports rorts, $100 million; the Paladin contract for Manus Island, $532 million; and, the big one, Canstruct on Nauru, $1.8 billion. This is public money—it's our money—which was shamelessly used to buy votes by the previous government. We thought things would be better with the Albanese government, but the culture of transaction persists. We've seen that with the community battery scheme, which bypassed the department and was not subjected to independent review.</para>
<para>Pork-barrelling costs us all. It's money which is spent by political parties to win votes, and that money means less money for education, housing and health. It corrodes trust in government, and it risks entrenching power and skewing election results. It is left to those of us who are not entrenched in those parties to stop the government of the day and the previous government from using public money to further their own political ends.</para>
<para>I thank the member for Indi for bringing us this important private member's bill, and I commend it to the House on behalf of the voters of Kooyong, who've had enough of government graft and dishonesty.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The time allocated for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Stop PEP11 Forever and Protect Our Coastal Waters) Bill 2024</title>
          <page.no>25</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7154" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Stop PEP11 Forever and Protect Our Coastal Waters) Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>First Reading</title>
            <page.no>25</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>25</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STEGGALL</name>
    <name.id>175696</name.id>
    <electorate>Warringah</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Warringah has made headlines in the last few weeks. We infamously snubbed both Pink and Kim Kardashian, yet last Friday we welcomed Prime Minister Anthony Albanese on his visit to Manly—somewhat ironically, given the nature of the bill I am introducing today. His visit coincided with Tripadvisor announcing Manly Beach ranking the seventh best beach in the world and the best beach in Australia, so it's nearly farcical when I stand here today to have to reintroduce a private member's bill to end PEP11, which is a permit for the drilling of oil and gas from our coast from Newcastle down to Manly.</para>
<para>Multiple politicians have vowed to end this project. It threatens the very beach that is rated one of the best in the world, but here we are, and it is still there. The Prime Minister has unequivocally stated that PEP11 ought to be consigned to the annals history, where it rightfully belongs. It's a permit that is described as at best just a disaster and at worst catastrophic. It's a permit that was staunchly objected to by Labor when in opposition, having gone through the rigorous process of shadow cabinet and caucus. Yet now Labor is in government it is still on the table and still being considered. The Prime Minister, I would argue, now needs to act. He's on the record as saying, 'It will be dead in the water.' It must be so. It is like a cockroach, this project.</para>
<para>In New South Wales the government have acted. There has been a significant change. They have been courageous and they've taken the lead to keep their coast clean and safe, legislating. The bill will be up for a vote within the next sitting week of the New South Wales parliament to ban offshore oil and gas exploration in state waters in an attempt to block such a project. To do so we also must pass this legislation in Commonwealth waters, so that when it comes to these kinds of projects they are stopped in both New South Wales waters and Commonwealth waters. It's historic legislation, setting the benchmark and ambition for other states. The New South Wales government is listening to its communities. It's time the Commonwealth government did the same. There are now calls for Victoria to pass similar legislation, and so it should absolutely be that in this place that the federal government should lead. This bill, the ending of PEP11, prevents any future permits or projects like it within that same region of federal waters off the coast of New South Wales.</para>
<para>For those who are not aware, Petroleum Exploration Permit 11 is a licence for oil and gas exploration off Warringah's coastline, covering some 4,575 square kilometres of ocean from Newcastle through the Central Coast and down to Manly. At points it comes to within five kilometres of the coastline.</para>
<para>Opposing PEP11 is an issue that unites most peoples of the coast and northern beaches. Our communities have protested, they've paddled out and they have been against this project for years. Yet it is still there. We've had petitions and over 60,000 signatures. Our ocean is fragile. We can't risk the environmental impacts associated with this licence. I have to mention the incredible work of organisations like Living Ocean, the Surfrider Foundation, the Surfrider Foundation Northern Beaches, Surfers for Climate and Save Our Coast. We've all been mobilising against this project. I recently received a petition from the Surfrider Foundation and Ben & Jerrys calling for an end to seismic blasting for oil and gas.</para>
<para>We know that seismic blasting harms marine wildlife, like the hearing of whales and dolphin, which they rely on in their sense to communicate, to find food and to navigate. We've seen the Leader of the Opposition and the member for New England go out in great support regarding the risks to whales, so I will expect them to also come out in support of banning seismic blasting and testing, because it is such a risk to marine life—in particular, whales. The area of PEP11 is similar to the Southern Ocean, which is facing over 400 days of continual seismic testing, and it has one of the highest whale migratory activities. Seismic blasting is followed by drilling and then extraction of fossil fuels. We know the risks of these fossil fuel protects are devastating. They just have to be stopped. For example, in 2021, an oil spill off Orange County in California decimated the beach and the wildlife and jeopardised a huge coastal economy. To be clear, PEP11 is a permit for oil and gas. So, along with banning seismic testing, we simply must relegate these projects to the dustbin of history.</para>
<para>I call on the government now to legislate to ban PEP11 and to take seriously the need to stop seismic blasting and testing in our coastal waters. We must ensure these incredible marine life areas are protected. We know they are under threat from warming and from so many other aspects. Now there is an opportunity for the government to walk the talk. Now we have the opportunity to debate this legislation and to ban once and for all the PEP11 licence and to ensure there can be no oil and gas exploration off our coast from Newcastle to Manly. Australians all around the country are very strongly against this use of our Commonwealth waters. We simply must do something about it.</para>
<para>History shows the joint authority process is flawed. It has undermined the role of ministers. It's led to judicial review of proceedings and potentially compensation claims. So the simplest solution is to legislate. I urge the government to do it now. I cede the remainder of my time to the member for Mackellar.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr SCAMPS</name>
    <name.id>299623</name.id>
    <electorate>Mackellar</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to second the member for Warringah's private member's bill, the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Stop PEP11 Forever and Protect Our Coastal Waters) Bill 2024. I thank her for her ongoing commitment to protecting our climate and our environment since her election.</para>
<para>When it comes to PEP11, I can't say it more clearly: the people of the northern beaches of Sydney, of Mackellar and Warringah, will never accept drilling for oil and gas off our beaches. They have said this repeatedly and vehemently for years now. The risks to both our climate and our marine and coastal environments from oil spills, methane leaks and seismic blasting are too great and too awful. This mining proposal also puts at risk thousands of local jobs in tourism and hospitality and recreational and commercial fishing from Manly to Newcastle and beyond.</para>
<para>The coastline impacted by PEP11 is among the most beautiful in the world. In Mackellar, we know that we might rival Manly for the most beautiful beaches in the world but it is up to us to preserve and protect them for future generations. Yet, as the Australian Marine Conservation Society states, if the PEP11 licence is renewed, it will allow seismic blasting and drilling for gas in the migration routes of humpback whales and southern right whales as well as critical habitat for numerous other threatened species. Seismic blasting—let's be clear—has been described as the sound of an atomic bomb going off in their underground homes every three to 10 seconds, 24 hours a day for months on end. Between 2018 and 2020, the community group Save Our Coast collated 77,000 signatures for a petition opposing PEP11. This is just one of the many community groups opposing PEP11 whom we thank for their work. Yet the fossil fuel company Advent Energy, 30 per cent owned by BPH Energy, are pushing on regardless as they seek to profit from the destruction of both our climate and our unique ocean environment.</para>
<para>This project is opposed by MPs of all electorates that will be impacted, from Manly to Newcastle, including the Labor member for Newcastle and the Labor member for Robertson on the Central Coast. Prior to the 2022 election, the Prime Minister himself called PEP11 an 'absurd proposal' and emphatically said that it would never happen under his leadership. Unlike the stage 3 tax cuts, there will be no happy voters if Labor is able to wriggle out of this election promise. So unpopular is PEP11 that even the fossil fuel addicted climate wreckers of the coalition's <inline font-style="italic">Nemesis</inline> era realised that they were on a hiding to nothing on this one. Despite the former resources minister wanting to progress PEP11, just 10 days after I launched as a candidate for the 2022 election the former Prime Minister in his capacity as the secret minister for resources announced an end to the project. The New South Wales state Labor Government have played their part in trying to end PEP-11. Earlier this month they took the extraordinary step of introducing a bill, which they are debating today, to prohibit seabed drilling in New South Wales state waters. Unfortunately, the PEP-11 licence applies to a region in Commonwealth waters, beyond the five-kilometre coastal zone of state waters. Ultimately, the final decision on PEP-11 will lie at the feet of the federal Labor resources minister. If the Labor government truly wishes to stand by its election promise, this bill provides an opportunity to do so, to end this saga once and for all.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The time allocated for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next siting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</title>
        <page.no>26</page.no>
        <type>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Aviation Industry</title>
          <page.no>26</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILKIE</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
    <electorate>Clark</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the conduct of Australian airlines has recently come under fire for a variety of practices, such as sometimes only offering Frequent Flyer and discount tickets one way, meaning customers are stuck with expensive tickets the other way, increasingly frequent flight delays and cancellations, and the linkage of passenger personal profiles to the fares offered to them;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) seeking refunds and other assistance for cancelled flights often leaves consumers feeling underwhelmed, with many offered little to no compensation for flight disruptions;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) is concerned about the high level of complaints about airlines as well as their low reliability of services; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) Australian airline staff are among the best in the world, yet bear the brunt of increasingly frustrated customers because of improper decisions by management within airline companies; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) calls on the Government to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) accept the ACCC's recommendations made in its submission to the Australian Government's Aviation Green Paper;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) establish an independent airline ombudsman with the power to make binding decisions, to allow for fair and efficient resolution of customer complaints; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) establish a targeted and fit-for-purpose compensation scheme for delayed and cancelled flights.</para></quote>
<para>It's obviously no secret that Australian airlines have regularly been in the headlines lately for all the wrong reasons, like unfair pricing practices, poor communication with customers, advertising fares for cancelled flights and frustrating flight delays. Indeed, in its recent report on domestic airline competition in Australia, the ACCC reported that 'service reliability remains a significant concern'. It's no wonder, when just in December last year, the industry cancelled more than 2,200 flights, or five per cent, which is more than double the industry long-term average. Passengers are also struggling with flight delays, with on-time performance rates declining. Indeed, just 63.6 per cent of flights arrived on time in December. What's even more frustrating is that these poor results are often the consequence of problems within the control of the airline, with the ACCC pointing the finger at the airlines management of:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… systemic issues associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, pilot shortages, pilot training bottlenecks and some supply chain disruptions.</para></quote>
<para>To be clear, my criticism is not directed at frontline airline staff. Indeed, most staff are among the best in the world, as I experienced just last week on my short trip to London, to Julian Assange. No, my criticism is directed squarely at airline management and the terrible decisions they've been making to maximising profit at the expense of all else.</para>
<para>Plenty of constituents have contacted my office about all this, sharing stories of delayed or cancelled flights and the financial burden that comes with that, as well as evidence of unfair pricing practices and poor communication from airlines. For example, one constituent told me about a flight that he and his wife booked to Perth with Virgin, late last year. The boarding time came and went. It was not until one hour after the scheduled departure that they were advised the flight was cancelled. While they were booked on another flight the following evening, there was no compensation for their $120 taxi fare to and from the airport nor for the very significant inconvenience. Another constituent was out of pocket by about $700 when Jetstar cancelled her flight at the last minute. She lost more than $500 just on the rental car and airport parking. She was told by Jetstar, in no uncertain terms, that the airline won't compensate these pre-booked expenses.</para>
<para>The airlines should not be able to get away with this, but they do. It's mostly the airlines who get to decide what happens when a passenger has missed a holiday, an important work meeting, a wedding or even a funeral. All too often, customers are left in terrible despair and very significantly out of pocket. Yes, while it is the case that Australians have some rights under Australian consumer law, those rights are far from clear when it comes to flight delays and cancellations. Moreover, the lack of effective mechanisms for consumers to resolve disputes and enforce their consumer guarantees leaves consumers having to resort to raising problems with regulators or pursuing claims in tribunals or small claims courts, which is time consuming, sometimes costly and often beyond people. No wonder contacts to the ACCC about airline issues have remained persistently high and above the pre-pandemic level. Indeed, for the first nine months of 2023, contacts to the ACCC about airlines were 179 per cent higher than in 2018 and 100 per cent higher than in 2019. No wonder, given Australia's lack of regulation, enforcement and complaint-handling mechanisms.</para>
<para>Indeed, Australia lags behind other countries when it comes to securing compensation from airlines. For example, in the UK, all airlines are required by law to ensure passengers arrive at their destination, to provide compensation if flights arrive more than three hours late for reasons within the airline's control and to support passengers who are delayed by providing meal vouchers, phone calls, accommodation and transport. Clearly, the Australian government must implement similar protections here.</para>
<para>While it's obviously a positive that Qantas is promising service improvements, the airlines simply cannot be left to regulate themselves. No, we need strong consumer protections, and the government must heed the calls of the ACCC, which in its domestic airline competition report called for an independent ombudsman scheme to handle consumer complaints and a targeted and fit-for-purpose compensation scheme for delayed and cancelled flights. Only then will Australians have confidence that they will not be unreasonably out of pocket for flight disruptions, and, if they are, that there will be appropriate mechanisms in place to help navigate the system.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Dr Ryan</name>
    <name.id>297660</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ZAPPIA</name>
    <name.id>HWB</name.id>
    <electorate>Makin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Clark raises an important issue. Australian airlines were once regarded as amongst the best in the world for service, safety and reliability. They were the airlines of choice for most Australians. Yet today all of that has changed. Confidence in the Australian airlines has been lost. We debate this motion at a time when the Virgin CEO has recently announced her retirement and the Qantas chair is on his way out, and long-time Qantas CEO Alan Joyce ended his term last year, when he had reportedly been earning $21.4 million.</para>
<para>It's all happened at a time that Qantas also lost $2.5 billion dollars in value, according to some reports; 1,700 workers were found to have been illegally sacked; several other Qantas executives have been overpaid; flights have been regularly cancelled or delayed; luggage has been misdirected or lost; services including aircraft maintenance have been outsourced or offshored; customers seeking refunds have been made to jump through hoops; and price gouging has become a regular feature of Qantas, adding to cost-of-living pressures, as we all know.</para>
<para>My office was regularly contacted by people who were unfairly dealt with by the two major airlines—in particular, when trying to seek refunds. Yet I understand that only in the first half of this year Qantas's profit was $1.25 billion.</para>
<para>We can all understand the disruption that would have occurred during the COVID years. I think that was to be expected, and every industry was disrupted. However, the downward slide of our two major airlines began many years ago.</para>
<para>The reality is, however, that today air travel is no longer a luxury for most people; it's a necessity of everyday life for so many. For them, the economic losses and the cost when flights are cancelled or delayed are considerable. The reality is also that airline flights are no longer cheap. Many people have to think carefully about whether they go interstate by taking an airline flight, because of the cost. I spoke to a businessperson not long ago who made that very point—that he had to choose whether he went interstate for an important event or whether he stayed home because of the cost of the flight.</para>
<para>The fact is that, as the member for Clark quite rightly points out, airlines must be held accountable when they don't deliver the services that customers have paid for, in the same way that retailers are accountable under consumer laws for the products that they sell. The ACCC must be given the power it needs to hold airlines to account. I do note that the motion expressly refers to the creation of an independent airline ombudsman with appropriate powers. Whether it's an ombudsman or it's the ACCC, the reality is that we need to find a mechanism by which the airlines are held to account for the services they promise and then do not deliver.</para>
<para>As the member for Clark also alluded, my comments in no way reflect on the Qantas and Virgin workforces. As members of parliament, we all fly often and we see the pressures those staff are under each and every day. They in turn, I think, have to deal with incredibly difficult circumstances and do the best they can under very difficult conditions. They often deal with very frustrated and angry customers. Again, I can understand why the customers are angry, but the staff, through no fault of their own, are trying to accommodate them in the best way they can, and I commend them for the effort they often go to.</para>
<para>The reality is that also, through COVID, many of them left the industry and did not come back afterwards, because they knew they would be coming back to an industry that was incredibly stressful. I sometimes wonder about how many of them need to take time off work because of the stress associated with it. I understand the government has got an aviation white paper process underway. That process is important. It's important, firstly, as I said earlier, in keeping the airlines to account but, more importantly, to restore public confidence in the Australian airlines—the way it used to be. I look forward to the outcome of that process.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr RYAN</name>
    <name.id>297660</name.id>
    <electorate>Kooyong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Recently I upset a few people by referring to the aviation industry in Australia as the mafia of the skies. I do have to apologise for any upset caused to the mafia, who, after all, operate according to a strict code of conduct called the omerta, which is enforced and respected—in contrast to our airlines. Australia's special circumstance as a large, sparsely populated continent makes our aviation sector critical to our ability to connect people; to support our businesses and our health, education and tourism sectors; and to secure our supply chains. The current effective duopoly held by Australia's two largest airlines in both the domestic and international markets has created a situation in which our national and personal interests are vulnerable to their aggressively commercial practices and profit oriented decisions.</para>
<para>In recent years we've been subjected to a shutdown by Qantas in an industrial dispute which left passengers stranded, to the withholding of thousands of refunds through design and poor service responses, and to the hollowing out of skilled, experienced and much-loved workforces, which has resulted in delayed flights and poor service. More recently we've experienced the sale of tickets for cancelled flights and the hoarding of airport slots with phantom flights, in order to prevent further competition. Disabled travellers have described being forced to crawl to their seats, being refused disembarkation at their destination and being left with broken wheelchairs. Loyalty programs have been devalued. Points can't be redeemed, or they can be used to travel only in one direction. And they're now so devalued that the points which would have got you a first-class return ticket to London in 1996 will now buy you a coffee machine.</para>
<para>Currently, Australian consumer law does not require airlines to guarantee the timeliness of their services or even that they will run. Consumers are required to seek compensation for losses through airlines' complaint mechanisms. Less than half of Australians who seek a refund for a cancelled flight receive it within a month; one-fifth wait more than six months. Other nations, like the UK, US, Canada and the EU, have a clear set of customer protections which specify appropriate means of communication, assistance and compensation when passengers are disadvantaged by circumstances that are within the airlines' responsibility and control.</para>
<para>In Europe, passengers whose flights arrive at their final destination with a delay of more than three hours receive a reimbursement of between 250 and 600 euros, depending on the length of the trip. Longer delays mean that passengers can opt for a full refund to be paid within seven days. The compensation rules do not apply in situations where extraordinary circumstances, such as poor weather, cause the delay. This form of regulation results in more on-time arrivals and reduced delays. Its effect has been shown to be greatest on routes with little competition and those for legacy carriers. This shows that regulated consumer rights can improve service quality when incentives for competition are weak. This model would also provide an active disincentive for slot hoarding.</para>
<para>Peak bodies and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission all support the need for airline-specific consumer protection. This should include the establishment of an independent travel and tourism industry ombudsman scheme. It should include standards of communication requirements for airlines to inform passengers in a timely fashion about delays and cancellations. That should occur both before departure but also while the passengers are on board. It should mandate proper heating and cooling of aircraft stuck on the tarmac and should enforce standards of care for disabled passengers. It must require airlines to pay compensation for passengers if they have delayed or cancelled flights, with clear rules and time frames around those refunds. It should include minimum requirements for travel credits. These rules would essentially create a passenger bill of rights in Australia. Australians deserve better from our airlines. It's past time that they stopped taking us for the very worst kind of ride.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HILL</name>
    <name.id>86256</name.id>
    <electorate>Bruce</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to commend the member for Clark for bringing on this debate on airline performance and what could be done. It is a good use of the parliament's debating time because the substandard performance of airlines across the country is definitely a hot-button issue. People are rightly angry. The last two years have been truly dreadful. It's not good enough that service standards are so low. The rate of cancelled and late flights is not good enough. It's not good enough that people can't get refunds and are mucked around. What's certainly not good enough is airlines' record of access for people with disability.</para>
<para>There are some signs of recent improvement. That's welcome. On-time performance has slowly improved since even December to January. It jumped from about 63½ per cent to 73½ per cent. That's material. But it's still below the long-term average of about 81 per cent. Prices have come down from their peak. Again, that's welcome. But it's still not good enough.</para>
<para>To be fair to the airlines, in the post-COVID recovery period things were difficult. It was difficult to get the workforce back in. People still had rolling waves of illness and people would call in sick. It was difficult to get all aircraft back into service. But those times are gone. We are well past that. The issue, when you strip it back, is not COVID. It's that the Australian aviation sector has been allowed to drift for way too long. The previous government did nothing substantive for a decade. They did nothing on the slot system at Sydney airport that they now screech about. They did nothing whatsoever on consumer protections. They did absolutely nothing to stand up to Qantas when they illegally sacked thousands of their own staff. They had no blueprint for this critical industry sector's future. The Australian aviation industry has been allowed to drift for far too long, so the government is acting through the aviation white paper.</para>
<para>I want to make a couple of comments. These are personal comments. They're not government policy on what, to be fair, are the very seductive calls for a consumer compensation scheme. I strongly agree we need more consumer protections. That is a focus of the white paper. I am personally a little sceptical, though, about introducing a European-style full compensation scheme here for a couple of reasons. They are things we should think about as we debate this over the next few months. I am concerned that actually what it would mean is that everyone would pay more because the cost of the scheme, like with insurance schemes, inevitably would get factored into the airlines' cost of doing business. That's something we need to think about because it's a commercial reality. Some people who experience unacceptable cancellations or delays would get compensated, but everyone else would pay more for their ticket to fund that scheme. We have to be upfront about that and think, 'Is that what we want?'</para>
<para>The other thing that worries me in the Australian context is that we have an enviable record of airline safety and we need to be really, really cautious before we introduce something that provides perverse disincentive on safety. You do not want airlines cutting corners, thinking, 'We are at two hours and 50 minutes; let's get the aeroplane ready to fly because we don't want to tip over the three hours,' or whatever number is the threshold for compensation. I'm not having a go. It's a good point to debate. But I am personally very sceptical that a full compensation scheme would actually be a good thing in Australia. I think stronger consumer protections and certainly rights to refunds are better.</para>
<para>The green paper and white paper process is happening. We have had more than 450 submissions. They are being looked at at the moment. The papers will be released later this year to guide the sector to 2050 and set the foundations for reform. We want to see through that a more competitive sector. Competition's critical to put downward pressure on prices and to give consumers more choice from destination to destination. We absolutely want to see stronger protections for consumers, which is something that the former government did absolutely nothing about in their wasted decade of division and decay and dysfunction.</para>
<para>We want to keep Australia's world-leading safety record. I believe we should want to see more secure jobs so that people who are, in effect, working permanently full time in the aviation industry can have a full-time job, get a home loan and be treated like other Australians, not be subject to casual, insecure, ever-degrading working conditions.</para>
<para>We want to see a pathway to net zero from the aviation sector. I applaud what the minister and government are doing on bringing the ACCC's monitoring powers into play here. They'll identify any inappropriate market conduct, but, importantly, they'll also directly inform the policy process. So what the ACCC is looking at and finding at the moment will come back into the policy process through the aviation white paper, which is to be released later this year.</para>
<para>I commend, again, the member for Clark for actually bringing a sensible debate. They weren't very good at government, and they're also not very good in opposition if you look at the <inline font-style="italic">Notice Paper</inline> and what's up for the rest of the day. So well done, you.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made in order of the day at the next sitting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Roads</title>
          <page.no>30</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PASIN</name>
    <name.id>240756</name.id>
    <electorate>Barker</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) Australia's severe and intense weather events over recent years have placed immense pressure on the nation's regional, rural, and remote road network;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the Australian Local Government Association estimates that the cost of repairing and replacing flood impacted roads is at least $3.8 billion in New South Wales, Queensland and Victoria alone; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the Government has scrapped the specifically targeted Bridges Renewal Program and Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity Program which, when combined, were valued at $193.5 million per annum by 2026-27;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) acknowledges that the federal budget saw financial assistance grants to local government cut as a percentage of tax revenue from 0.52 per cent to 0.50 per cent in stark contrast to councils' long-term aim of achieving 1.0 per cent of tax revenue; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) calls on the Government to invest in Australia's regional, rural and remote road network to support local governments, and improve road safety and freight productivity.</para></quote>
<para>I am grateful to the House for the opportunity to debate this motion. In short, it's a motion that calls on those opposite who, contrary to the previous speaker, might not be aware that they are in charge of the agenda and, indeed, the nation to increase investment in Australia's rural, regional and remote road network to support local governments, improve road safety and freight productivity.</para>
<para>I'm so pleased that the member opposite—the relevant minister, who, prior to coming to this place, was a mayor of her local community—is here to listen to this. My message to the member for Eden-Monaro is: why aren't you standing up on behalf of your former colleagues, the mayors across the country?</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms McBain</name>
    <name.id>281988</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>That's why we've doubled Roads to Recovery.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PASIN</name>
    <name.id>240756</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'll take the interjection. The member opposite says, 'We've doubled Roads to Recovery.' So, ladies and gentlemen in the gallery, Roads to Recovery was set at $500 million. The local government sector asked this government to increase it to $800 million. Do you know what they've done? They've increased it to a billion dollars. We should all be very happy about that, shouldn't we? Because it has gone from $500 million to a billion dollars. In anyone's language, that's an increase. But unfortunately, like everything with this government, you need to read the fine print, because the spin's one thing, and the reality is something else. So I'm so pleased that the member opposite, who has responsibility for this space, has raised Roads to Recovery, because the reality is that it will get to a billion dollars in 10 years time.</para>
<para>It's $500 million today. The local government sector asked for $800 million, and those opposite said: 'You know what. We'll knock it up by $50 million a year.' But that's not what they told the community. They told the community, 'We're increasing ceasing it to a billion dollars', and so they are. But my 15-year-old will be 25 by the time that happens. News flash for those opposite: the way they're operate the economy, inflation will be such that a billion dollars in 10 years time may well be something closer to $500 million today.</para>
<para>Those opposite need to be very careful about these really cute arguments. The reality is that there are 800,000 kilometres of road network in this country, and 600,000 of it is managed by the good people who work and volunteer their time—I'm talking about members of local government—to manage that road network. Those opposite want us to see increased wages. I don't want to live in a low wage Australia, but the only way we achieve this—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PASIN</name>
    <name.id>240756</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Those opposite are actually creating the working poor by having inflation grow faster than wages, so you have real wage decreases.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PASIN</name>
    <name.id>240756</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Let them go, Mr Deputy Speaker. They unfortunately bear themselves out.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>No.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PASIN</name>
    <name.id>240756</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The reality is that the only way you can sustain higher increases in wages in this country is to drive productivity. Those opposite need to realise that wage increases can't just happen; they need to be on the back of productivity increases. That's why we need to be investing in this road network. We need to make it cheaper to get our products from rural and regional Australia to the market and to the port. That's how we drive higher lifestyle outcomes in this country.</para>
<para>While I'm on the topic of local government, and while I have the minister opposite, local government also asks for a higher share of tax revenue to go to local government. When we left office, the share was 0.52 per cent. The aim for local government is to drive it to one per cent. But do you know what it is today? It's 0.5 per cent. I appreciate that's a modest decrease, but it's heading in the wrong direction. I don't blame the member opposite. Unfortunately, she's not the senior minister, and, in a way, I don't even blame the senior minister. It's those in ERC that need to take a serious look at what they're doing in this country. They're cancelling the Bridges Renewal Program.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms McBain</name>
    <name.id>281988</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>You froze indexation.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PASIN</name>
    <name.id>240756</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I think we've tickled a nerve, because the minister opposite is getting upset. We may have frozen funding, but you've cut funding. You cancelled bridges renewal and the Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity Program. You will own this. The roads are decaying, and it's not going to change.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Birrell</name>
    <name.id>288713</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REPACHOLI</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>As Dorothea Mackellar said, we're a land of drought and flooding rains. There is no doubt that the harsh weather has had an impact on our road network. The Hunter has been impacted by that weather as much as any other area. Less than a month after I was declared the member for Hunter, my electorate was smashed by floods that cut a swathe of damage throughout the Hunter. Roads right across the Hunter electorate, from Lake Macquarie to Muswellbrook, were severely damaged. Unlike those opposite, who did nothing to help following the bushfires that ravaged parts of the Hunter in 2019 and 2020, the Albanese government stepped up and delivered to the areas impacted by these weather events. We provided councils with 100 per cent of the 2023-24 financial assistance grants—that is $3.1 billion—in advance, which was paid to the states and territories in June 2023. We also joined the NSW government to provide $200 million as part of the Infrastructure Betterment Fund to help recovery efforts focus on rebuilding damaged and destroyed infrastructure, such as bridges and stormwater drainage, in a more resilient way. In a further show of bipartisanship, the NSW government and the federal government provided $312½ million to target road- and transport-related infrastructure through the Regional Roads and Transport Recovery Package.</para>
<para>In times of need, the community don't want politics; they just want help. The former NSW Liberal National government should have put politics aside and helped impact the communities with the funds they needed to rebuild. Public infrastructure can literally save lives during emergencies, whether it's roads and bridges being used as evacuation routes or stormwater drainage better managing the large volume of water during floods. But those opposite showed how pathetic they are with their grubby political games. There is work to do, and the Albanese government is getting on with the job by strengthening its commitment to regional roads, with significant increase in funding and changes to programs to reduce the administrative burden on local councils. In my electorate, we have committed $560 million to the Singleton Bypass, which is underway and expected to be open to traffic late 2026.</para>
<para>Likewise, we have committed $270 million to the Muswellbrook bypass, which has seen early works get underway, and work to announce the contractor is also underway. The Putty Road, which was damaged in 2022, has also received significant funding to repair multiple large landslips and for stabilisation works. Let's not forget the joint funding of $4.5 million between state and federal governments to raise the Kilfoyles Bridge at Lambs Valley. If you listened to those opposite, you would think nothing is happening—that not a single bit of roadworks has been undertaken. It is like the little boy who cried wolf. They have told so many fake stories about road funding that they are beginning to believe their own lies.</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government continues to deliver on its commitment to improve road safety in the Hunter by significantly increasing funding available to local councils to maintain and upgrade their road networks. The Roads to Recovery funding will rise gradually from $500 million to $1 billion per year. Black spot funding will also increase from the current annual commitment of $110 million to $150 million. The Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity Program and the Bridges Renewal Program will be merged into a new Safer Local Roads and Infrastructure Program. The amount of funding for the new program will also gradually increase such that $200 million will be available per year, up from the current $150 million total annual investment in the Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity Program and the Bridges Renewal Program.</para>
<para>These programs are already having a significant impact on road quality and safety in New South Wales communities, with millions of dollars flowing to local councils under Roads to Recovery funding. In addition, a combined total of more than $440 million has been provided to New South Wales across the life of the Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity Program and the Bridges Renewal Program. Those opposite want to play petty political games and are so miserable about the great work that we are doing that, if you gave them a straw, they would suck the fun out of someone else's day. This motion is a perfect example of that.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BIRRELL</name>
    <name.id>288713</name.id>
    <electorate>Nicholls</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm very pleased to rise in support of the excellent motion put forward by the member for Barker. The reality is that the roads are a disgrace. They're getting worse. Despite platitudes from those on that side of the chamber, I don't see any improvement in the roads and I don't see any effort happening on the ground to fix what is a significant problem, particularly for regional areas.</para>
<para>There have been some terrible weather impacts on our infrastructure, particularly in my electorate. Communities were isolated and displaced, sometimes for weeks and months. The national freight supply chains were disrupted. There have been lengthy diversions to deliver essential goods. In my electorate, this was manifested particularly because we don't have a second bridge over the Goulburn River. There's only one, which is called the Peter Ross-Edwards Causeway. When that gets cut, it means that not only are emergency services vehicles cut on both sides of the river but fresh produce, which is a stock-in-trade for my electorate, whether it be fruit or milk, can't get from one side to the other. Also we couldn't get exports to the port. A lot of these exports are perishable.</para>
<para>The coalition government was attempting to work with a recalcitrant Victorian government on the Shepparton bypass, a critical road infrastructure project that would have put that second crossing over the Goulburn River and would have alleviated a lot of the problems that I've just described. Labor's action in office was to rip away $208 million that had been put towards that project by the previous coalition government, devastating those in my community who wanted to see some action on the infrastructure project.</para>
<para>Normal maintenance regimes and funding will not catch up with what is a terrible deterioration of the road conditions around regional Australia. Instead, we've got this game of patching up potholes, reducing speed limits and erecting 'rough surface' warning signs. It can be many months of dodging damaged roads before even temporary repairs happen, and the temporary repairs seem to wash out. I don't know what's happening under the regime of the far too long existing Victorian Labor government and now the federal Labor government, but the roads are deteriorating and the temporary 'improvements' that are being made seem to get washed out with every rain event.</para>
<para>Now, national and state roads are very bad. Local road networks are worse. Locally controlled roads account for approximately 77 per cent of total road length in Australia, and the National Transport Commission estimates that 36 per cent of all kilometres travelled in Australia are on local roads. A third of all heavy vehicles registered in Victoria are in my electorate, and their operations are made more dangerous and more costly because of the state of the roads.</para>
<para>These heavy vehicle operators are putting millions and millions of dollars worth of assets on the roads. They deserve a safe working environment, and a safe road that's in reasonable condition is a safe working environment. They deserve to be able to put their heavy vehicles on the roads, earning export dollars for us, often taking agricultural produce in my electorate or mining goods in other electorates to Australian ports. They deserve to be able to do that without millions and millions of dollars in expensive repairs to their vehicles because of the terrible state of the roads.</para>
<para>I want to finish on this point. Statistics show that 55 per cent of road fatalities occur on rural roads, but only 25 per cent of the Victorian population live in rural Victoria. We need safer drivers. The drivers have a responsibility in this for their own safe behaviour, but we also need safer vehicles and safer roads. That's where government can come in and add to the safety of people on our roads by improving the road network. I note that, in the member for Barker's private member's motion, he requests that the data be more transparent about what causes some of these road accidents and what causes some of these road fatalities. Often, we don't know what it is. We assume that a major contributing factor is the state of the roads, but we can't get that information out, and we need that information to be able to apply for black spot funding and for other approaches to improving road safety by improving road conditions.</para>
<para>I support the member for Barker's private member's bill because the roads are in a terrible state and I don't see the government, either state or federal, doing enough about it.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BRIAN MITCHELL</name>
    <name.id>129164</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyons</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>You wouldn't believe it. Apparently, the roads in Australia and country Australia were perfect up until 20 months ago, when the Labor government came to office! Apparently, after 10 years of coalition government, the roads were perfect and it's only been in the last 20 months that they've all deteriorated and started to fall apart. What a joke. Those opposite had 10 years to deal with this issue, and what we saw in those 10 years was a deterioration in Australia's road network. This government is putting more money into Australia's road network to address the issue.</para>
<para>I actually thank the member for Barker for offering the opportunity to speak on this matter. I'm very proud, as a member of the Albanese government, to be speaking on it, because the issue of severe weather and roads is, unfortunately, one close to my heart and my electorate. Just last Wednesday, my constituents were at the mercy of a very severe thunderstorm—the cell over the townships of St Helens and Scamander over the east coast, with 145 millilitres of rain recorded in the space of just a few hours. The heavy rains and lightning strikes flooded homes, knocked out power and cut roads on Tasmania's east coast, including the state government's Tasman Highway, which is the main entry and exit point to the area. All the while, the rest of the state, particularly in the south, spent most of Wednesday and Thursday in temperatures of 30 to 35 degrees. It may not sound hot to much of mainland Australia, but in Tasmania that's a heatwave, with the SES and fireys fighting bushfires through the central highlands of my electorate. Just today I've heard that there's another watch-and-act in that area, with conditions pretty dicey as well. I'd like to put on the record my thanks for the remarkable work of the SES, fireys and volunteers, as well as members of the public, who do so much to help others and protect properties, whether from flooding or fire.</para>
<para>The severity and frequency of heatwaves and flooding increasing due to climate change—that's no secret. We are a government that will work alongside state governments and councils to ensure that the funding is there to keep our roads prepared and safe when these events occur. The Albanese government is strengthening its commitment to regional roads, with significant increases in funding and changes to programs to reduce the administrative burden on local councils. Fifty-seven per cent of major projects we are investing in under the Infrastructure Investment Program are in regional areas, which include the $629 million for the new Bridgewater Bridge in my electorate. Our Roads to Recovery funding will rise from $500 million to $1 billion per year over the decade and black spot funding will increase from the current annual commitment of $110 million per year to $150 million per year. Funding is going up.</para>
<para>Financial assistance grants to local governments have increased at each budget under this government. They were $2.8 billion in 2022-23 and are now increasing to $3.1 billion in 2023-24. In my electorate, the government has committed to significant increases in road funding for my local councils. In May last year we announced additional funding for country roads in all 12 councils in my electorate. They were set to receive $6.4 million, and they're now receiving an additional $3.7 million in funding as part of our commitment to the regions. In June $1.8 million in funding was matched by the Tasmanian government as part of the Disaster Ready Fund arrangements to prepare the Northern Midlands LGA for flooding.</para>
<para>Opposite, there are cries that we are apparently scrapping the Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity Program and the Bridges Renewal Program. They are merely headline-grabbing cries from those opposite, as they ignore the fact we are simply merging those programs into a new, safer Local Roads and Infrastructure Program, and not a single dollar is being cut. We will, in fact, gradually increase the funding from $150 million to $200 million. We are well aware of the pressures facing local governments in the face of weather events across the country and will continue to work with them to ensure the safety of everyone using our roads.</para>
<para>Finally, the member for Barker mentioned wages and the link to productivity. He's got to understand that over the last two decades productivity has been on a steep increase across the Western world, but wages have largely flatlined. It's great to get more productivity, but we are unashamedly a government that backs higher wages. We want Australian workers to earn more and keep more of what they earn.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOYCE</name>
    <name.id>299498</name.id>
    <electorate>Flynn</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to support the member for Barker's motion, and I too call on the government to invest in Australia's regional and rural remote road network and to support local governments to improve road safety and freight productivity.</para>
<para>The Flynn electorate is over 132,000 square kilometres—almost twice the size of Tasmania. There are 401 individual localities in my electorate, and every single one of them has got serious concerns about the condition of their road networks. Here's why: lack of funding for road infrastructure has already been identified by the Queensland Auditor-General's report as involving a projected $9 billion shortfall. Bridge and culvert refurbishment and road resheeting are operating at less than 20 per cent of their budget needs. In the Gladstone area there are four bridges with oversize load and weight restrictions on them. These bridges need to be repaired because they present huge logistical problems for the region. The former coalition government secured $100 million for this port access road problem back on 3 April 2019. However, this has not progressed, and access to the Gladstone Port project is stagnant and has still been in the planning stages since 2020.</para>
<para>Motorists have to navigate through 19 sets of traffic lights when travelling through Rockhampton. The Rockhampton Ring Road has been a political football for several years, with construction only starting late last year. In the meantime, the town is filled with delays every time an oversized load is driven through, including defence machinery and renewable energy components.</para>
<para>Another bridge that has weight and load restrictions is the Neerkol Bridge near Stanwell Power Station. The bridge was built in 1974. Stanwell has been identified as a clean energy hub by the Queensland government, yet the bridge provides several challenges going forward not only due to load and weight restrictions but also to flooding problems.</para>
<para>Labor's proposed carbon tax on new vehicles will have serious consequences for regional Australia and its road network. Australians could pay up to $25,000 more for their favourite family car, SUV or four-wheel drive, and up to $18,000 more for their favourite ute, according to research undertaken by the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries. This will impact individuals, households and businesses across Australia, including in the electorate of Flynn. These impacts include $11,020 more for a Toyota RAV4, $12,180 more for an MG ZS, $25,050 more for a Toyota LandCruiser, $17,950 more for a Ford Ranger, $14,490 more for a Toyota HiLux and $13,830 more for an Isuzu D-Max. Labor's policy will hit families who rely on SUVs to get their children to school, and tradies and farmers who rely on their utes to do their job. Penalties will be imposed on popular petrol, diesel and hybrid models to subsidise the cost of electric vehicles for the rich and inner-city elites.</para>
<para>The Flynn electorate is different to other metropolitan areas. We drive longer distances and we use our cars for work and recreation. Labor claims the new vehicle efficiency standard will result in lower running costs for new cars—but not if you can't afford to buy one. If Labor's family car carbon tax goes ahead in its current planned trajectory, some manufacturers are also likely to withdraw from the Australian market.</para>
<para>The Labor government's ongoing funding cuts to road programs, such as to the Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity Program, highlight Labor's failure to understand the crucial role that Australia's road networks provide in driving national economic growth and prosperity. Flynn projects that have been previously funded by the Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity Program include the heavy vehicle detour at Theodore, the productivity enhancement package on the Gregory Highway, the Goovigen Connection Road, the Biloela heavy bypass, Macquarie Street at Gracemere, the Boongary Road upgrade at Kabra, and the Dawson Highway Gladstone-Biloela upgrades.</para>
<para>I wish to conclude and express my absolute disgust at the Labor government's decision to push back funding of $400 million to upgrade the beef roads network, which would have seen 457 kilometres of beef corridors sealed from the start date of 2025-26 financial year, but has been pushed out to the 2027-28 financial year. The government's decision to delay this funding for the beef corridors is evidence that they are happy to treat Central Queensland like a cash cow but not invest in this critical infrastructure that is so important to business and industry.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr NEUMANN</name>
    <name.id>HVO</name.id>
    <electorate>Blair</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I really wonder what the point of the National Party is. Why are they in coalition with the Liberals? They haven't achieved anything in regional and rural areas for nearly a decade. We've seen on display this morning the political strategy and tactics of the Liberal and National parties. The National Party want to forget they were in power. It's all about forgetting they were in power for 10 years. And, for the Liberal Party, in the last few weeks it's been all about fear; you've got to be fearful of everyone. So it's about forget and fear. That's the modus operandi of the coalition parties' strategy and tactics.</para>
<para>This motion is so important to the member for Barker that he's just left the chamber and hasn't bothered listening to his erstwhile honourable colleague, the member for Flynn. He's not a bad bloke, actually, even though we might disagree on politics from time to time. But he hasn't even stayed here. He's put forward a motion in the chamber and he's got so many people here to support him, but he hasn't even stayed to listen to his Queensland colleague or Victorian National Party colleagues. So have a yarn to the Liberal Party, member for Flynn, because I can tell you that they've deserted you and done nothing in regional areas for a decade.</para>
<para>The member for Barker talked about wages. Now, we've had three consecutive quarters of wage growth in this country. During the ATM government—that is, the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison government—they could spend money everywhere in areas they wanted to, except in National Party seats, because they didn't get anything, apparently, according to these members here opposite. Under the ATM government, the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison government—the second-biggest taxing government in the history of the Commonwealth government, after the Howard government—wages grew by two per cent on average per year. Under us, wages are growing by almost four per cent, and that's what the data from the December quarter said recently. The member for Barker can come here and give us lectures! We've changed industrial relations law. We've got enterprise bargaining agreements in the health area and the education area, and we've regulated increases in aged-care funding for people who work in the sector.</para>
<para>Now, I live in a regional and rural area in Queensland, and I can tell you that I won't take lectures from those opposite, who spent election campaign after election campaign opposing upgrades to roads in my electorate, including the Ipswich Motorway between Brisbane and Ipswich. That motorway is important for the rural areas up towards Toowoomba, south to the New South Wales border and up to the Brisbane Valley Highway. Those opposite opposed—election after election—upgrades. In fact, they went to the 2010 election saying they were going to stop construction. That's the need of the National Party. Warren Truss stood here in the parliament and said, if they win the election, they'll stop construction on that important regional road. So I won't take lectures from those opposite when it comes to regional roads and rural infrastructure.</para>
<para>They opposed the recovery of Queensland after the 2011 floods. When we put forward stimulus packages and massive road funding increases when we were last in government, the coalition members—including the National Party members—voted against that road funding. They voted against it. They were claiming that they were against school halls and libraries, except in their own electorates when they turned up to open them and said that they weren't against them. But they opposed the road funding. They voted against road funding projects in the federal parliament that were crucial for the rural and regional areas in South-East Queensland—including my electorate, the member for Oxley's electorate and the member for Moreton's electorate.</para>
<para>We've had major floods, as the member for Barker in his motion talks about. In my electorate, we had floods in 2011, 2013 and 2022. I experienced, in 1974, the '74 flood as a kid and I saw how devastating it was and the adverse impact it had on my local community of Ipswich. It's important to rebuild—and we did. When I was the assistant minister to the Attorney-General, we actually provided $11 billion for road infrastructure and other community infrastructure for South-East Queensland and Queensland generally. Those opposite sat in this chamber and voted against that funding. They voted against it. Don't listen to what they say. Look at how they vote and what they do. They've got political amnesia. The only time they remember anything is when they go on the ABC and <inline font-style="italic">Nemesis</inline>; otherwise, the last nine or 10 years don't exist because they didn't achieve anything over the last nine or 10 years. This motion should be treated with the disrespect that I give it, and I'll sit down because I think it's a ridiculous motion.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Education</title>
          <page.no>35</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PERRETT</name>
    <name.id>HVP</name.id>
    <electorate>Moreton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise in support of the hardworking member for Robertson's motion regarding the commitment of the Albanese government to better and fairer education for all Australians. Education is the foundation for building a better life for every Australian. It enables both individuals and societies to thrive—from the early years at kindergarten through to primary and secondary school and then on to TAFE or uni. Education is the pathway to prosperity, dignity, purpose and wellbeing. Good education creates a smarter and more equitable nation. Therefore, all Australians need equal access and opportunities to education. It should never be about your credit card; it should never be about the haves and the have-nots. The drive for better and fairer education is close to my heart, and I say that as the proud dad of a high schooler in year 10—Leo, I hope you're having a good day and not listening to this on your phone—and a uni student, and in a former life I was an English teacher. I worked in both state and independent schools for 11 years in Queensland. From both sides of the fence, I can vouch for the importance of teaching and how it can change lives.</para>
<para>I'd like to thank all of the teachers and their support staff in the 49 schools across my electorate of Moreton for their dedication and commitment. And I think I can speak for all MPs when I say that all MPs in this country appreciate the effort of our teachers and their support staff. I'd like to congratulate the Minister for Education for the progress he's made since May 2022. We've got a lot of work to do, obviously; there's been a bit of a mess left behind by the former coalition government.</para>
<para>One of the things that we really need to do is fix that teacher shortage. Obviously, that didn't start when Labor took office. To provide equal access to education, we need to urgently address the questions of why too few people are choosing teaching and why too many trained staff are leaving the profession—some after only two or three years. The National Teacher Workforce Action Plan is focusing on direct and measurable actions, like the $30 billion to establish the teacher Workload Reduction Fund and the $10 million for improved professional development opportunities. We're bolstering the number of teachers with 4,000 additional places in teaching degrees and $56 million for Commonwealth Teaching Scholarships. These scholarships will attract more high achievers to the profession. I note that over 3,000 applications have already been received. To ensure ongoing equal access, the scholarship priority groups include First Nations peoples; people from rural, regional and remote areas, because the Labor Party will always look after the bush; and also people with disability.</para>
<para>Another focus of the Albanese government is on school infrastructure. The $275 million first phase of the Schools Upgrade Fund will provide facilities, upgrade IT equipment and develop outdoor learning spaces across over 1,500 schools. Round 2 provides $215 million for public schools to take on large projects, such as new facilities. I'm proud that the funding will be prioritised for schools with high numbers of students from low socioeconomic backgrounds, First Nations students and students with a disability. This is a capital injection version of needs based funding.</para>
<para>Labor is also negotiating the next National School Reform Agreement this year. We're committed to lifting every school to 100 per cent of their fair funding level. Contrast this to the schools agreement which was signed by the coalition government under the member for Cook. Under that agreement, students from disadvantaged backgrounds were found to be three times more likely to fall behind, and 86,000 students didn't meet either the basic literacy standard or the numeracy standard. Sensible governments ensure that students, especially those from disadvantaged backgrounds, are not left behind.</para>
<para>The review to inform a better and fairer education system was published in December last year and provided guidance on key reforms related to equity, wellbeing and teacher workforce. The negotiations for the National School Reform Agreement will tie funding to reform and will lead to measures that result in a better and fairer education and in closing that education gap.</para>
<para>I want to finish with a quick word about the importance of student wellbeing. The Albanese Labor government has put over $203 million towards the Student Wellbeing Boost program. Last week, I hosted a roundtable on loneliness, especially loneliness amongst 18- to 25-year-olds, with the member for Boothby and the member for Hunter. Supporting the mental health and wellbeing of school students can only improve outcomes as they transition to vocational education or uni.</para>
<para>Education remains the great transformational opportunity. Minister Clare feels this in his bones, and he's rolling out policies to make it so—from the Torres Strait to Tasmania, from Carnarvon to Coolangatta and everywhere in between. There are no quick fixes to the challenges in the education sector, but Minister Clare is kicking things along nicely.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
    <electorate>Wannon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Once again, what we're seeing from the Labor Party is a lot of talk, a lot of reviews and a lot of hot air. When it comes to actually doing anything—nothing! Absolutely nothing.</para>
<para>The one thing about this motion that stands out more than anything else is this: what about educational outcomes? What about making sure that, when it comes to kids who are at school, the focus is going to be on ensuring that they can read, write and add up at the end of their schooling? There is nothing about this. What we need to be doing is focusing on ensuring that everything we're doing is student centred. It's about getting better outcomes for students. It's not just about governments talking about 'we're doing this' or 'we're doing that'. There is nothing here in this motion which says, 'What we want to do is improve the educational outcomes of our students.'</para>
<para>Look at what the government is doing in the childcare sector. It's all talk. Come to my community. Go to the member for Grey's community. Go to Tasmania. People can't get access to child care.</para>
<para>Where's the solution? Where's the talk about trying to do that? It's nowhere in this motion. Where are the outcomes when it comes to improving the pipeline of teachers for our schools? We need more teachers. We need better qualified teachers. We need teachers who can go out into the regions and out into remote Australia, and can deliver the types of outcomes that we want for our students. There's nothing there. Then we get to higher education. We've just seen this higher education review announced. There are no extra dollars—not a cent. But, even more importantly, where's the focus on getting better outcomes in the sectors that we need to grow our economy going forward?</para>
<para>What are the growth areas in employment going forward for this nation? Health care, science and technology, education and construction—these four industries are projected to provide 62 per cent of total employment growth over the next five years. What did the coalition do to try to help and support these sectors going forward? We cut the price that any student who goes into these areas has to pay for their degree. That means discounted fees for teaching, for nursing, for clinical psychology, for English and languages, for agriculture, for maths, for science, for health, for architecture, for environmental science, for IT and for engineering. What we did was cut the cost of the student's degree in any of those areas because they are the growth areas. They're the areas that we want to encourage students to go into because that's where the jobs of the future are going to be. I say to those opposite: I look forward to you contemplating increasing the cost of those degrees in those areas again because you will be howled down. We had the courage to say, 'These are the areas that we want students to go into, and we're going to cut the price of their degrees.'</para>
<para>What I say to the government is: you should be very transparent about the cost of degrees, you should be very transparent about where the future needs of our economy are and you should be ensuring that you're publicising the fact that, if you're a young student and you're leaving school at the moment, these are the areas we are encouraging you to go into because these are the areas where future employment growth will be. Instead, what are we hearing from those opposite? We hear crickets. They don't want to own up to the fact that what we did when we were in government was say to anyone who wants to go in those areas, 'We will cut the cost of your degree.' That is good, sensible policymaking. It's going to be very interesting to see what happens because the minister said, 'I don't like the Job-ready Graduates project.' Well, you come in and increase degrees in those areas then.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURNELL</name>
    <name.id>300129</name.id>
    <electorate>Spence</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Perhaps I shouldn't be taking Pink Floyd quite so literally, but, to disagree with the legends themselves, we do in fact need education. I thank the member for Robertson for moving this motion on such an important issue, one that forms a cornerstone amongst the bedrock of many facets of public policy, with policies aimed at not just levelling the playing field across all forms of education but equipping Australians of all ages and all abilities with the building blocks needed to build themselves up while they work towards playing their part in building an Australia for the future, one that we can all be proud of.</para>
<para>Education starts at early childhood and continues onward on a journey that doesn't necessarily have a use-by date. Education is, after all, a lifelong journey—an extremely rich and rewarding one. As such, this motion also provides me with ample opportunity to speak to the impacts that both the presence and absence of a world-class education system can mean for the Australia of today and the Australia of tomorrow. Having the opportunity to obtain a quality education is often one of life's great equalisers.</para>
<para>But, as so often is the case, that is contingent on every child—every student—having equal access to a quality education. For many, this simply does not eventuate. Oftentimes, the disparity between the haves and the have-nots can frankly be quite confronting. These impacts can be felt in the immediate term but have knock-on effects in the longer term, too. In early September last year, I made remarks in this place in support of legislation that would implement a number of reforms from the <inline font-style="italic">Australian Universities Accord interim report</inline>. I spoke of the need for a number of these reforms to flow to my electorate of Spence. Since reading the interim report, I have continued to been a vocal advocate for the establishment of a tertiary hub within my electorate.</para>
<para>Yesterday, I had the opportunity to start reading through the final report of the Australian Universities Accord. I felt it poignant to discuss a few aspects of the report along with higher and vocational education and training. Jobs and Skills Australia anticipates that, over the next decade, more than 90 per cent of new jobs will require post-school qualifications, with 50 per cent requiring a bachelor's degree or higher. The report notes that a failure to increase student numbers to meet these needs could do lasting damage to Australia's prospects for national economic success.</para>
<para>The OECD defines tertiary education as being at a level 'higher than diploma'; 16½ per cent of Spence have attained an education of that level. For a bachelor's degree or higher, that number sinks to 9.5 per cent. This is supplemented by the nearly 40 per cent who have obtained a VET qualification. One of the big contributors to this number is Elizabeth TAFE—an institution whose students and educators I was extremely proud to visit alongside the Minister for Skills and Training some time ago. But those are starkly contrasted by the numbers in the bottom end of the nation when it comes to tertiary education.</para>
<para>A university education is not something everyone must have immediately after high school. Education is not a linear journey nor a timed one. But having the right settings in place across all forms of education to give everyone the best chance of obtaining such an education for the future does have a clock ticking above it. These numbers do not occur as a coincidence or in a vacuum. We must act to reduce barriers to entry and mitigate a number of entrenched disadvantages experienced by many of those who aspire to study at university. That is an aspirational class I can certainly get behind.</para>
<para>Education is as valuable to society as it is to the individual. It is transformative to the lives of those who have the support necessary to overcome challenges that would prevent their willingness and ability to study and reach their full potential. I'm especially proud to be part of a government that supports education, whether that be by addressing teacher shortages through the National Teacher Workforce Action Plan—a comprehensive strategy designed to attract and retain educators—by using the Schools Upgrade Fund to build educational infrastructure and environments where students can thrive or by working with state and territory education ministers to reduce the school funding equity gap as part of the National School Reform Agreement being negotiated this year. Filling that gap will help thousands of children in my electorate realise potential they may not have known existed.</para>
<para>With 35,000 students in Spence, particularly those 25,000 from public schools, I can think of thousands of reasons to get this right. To my old teachers Mr Fitzgibbon, from when I was at primary school, and Mr Blue, from when I was at senior college, thank you very much for the knowledge that you imparted on me to allow me to get to this place. I really appreciate it. Thank you.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr SCAMPS</name>
    <name.id>299623</name.id>
    <electorate>Mackellar</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the motion presented to this House by my colleague the member for Robertson. I too would like to thank all my teachers and teachers everywhere for the hard work they do, their dedication and their commitment. There are two aspects to this motion today that I would particularly like to address. They are the focus on building a better and fairer education system and the need to work with state and territory governments to get all schools on a path to full and fair funding.</para>
<para>In these two respects, this motion is very timely. Just last week, the Australian Education Union released a report setting out a comparison on capital spending in the public and private school sectors. Capital spending in the schools context means school infrastructure—halls, theatres, toilets, new buildings, new roofs. But, before I talk about the results of this report, I'd like to relay an experience of one of my own schools in my electorate of Mackellar. Last year, I was invited by the P&C to visit a school just a stone's throw from my office. Before I say anything, I have to say that it is a most wonderful school. They have dedicated staff, they have beautiful, terrific students who are aspiring to achieve in their chosen fields and they have a committed P&C association doing what they can to support this school. It is a wonderful, vibrant school community. But what I saw that day nearly brought me to tears, because the infrastructure was in such a state of disrepair and neglect that it was almost Third World. There was mould everywhere—ceilings, walls, floors. Toilet doors were off their hinges. Roofs were leaking. Bunsen burners had to be turned off because they leaked gas in chemistry classrooms. It was appalling, and I was horrified.</para>
<para>This is in stark contrast to what is happening in the private school sector. In 2021, one prestigious Sydney boys school spent $63.5 million on fitness and drama facilities, which is absolutely wonderful for that school and those children, but it equated to more than the entire Northern Territory and Tasmanian governments' combined spending on new and upgraded infrastructure in public schools that same year.</para>
<para>The other key part of the school funding picture is what is called the schooling resource standard, or SRS. The SRS is an estimate of how much total public funding a school needs to meet its students' educational needs. It's based on the recommendations that were made in the 2011 Gonski Review of Funding for Schooling, which, as most people are aware, was never fully implemented. Only 1.3 per cent of public schools are fully funded under the SRS model. Really, this is a scandal. What it means is that, if we exclude territories for a moment, no student in an Australian public school has the funding necessary to meet their educational needs.</para>
<para>Private schools, yes, are mostly privately funded through school fees and contributions, but they are also topped up by taxpayer money. This takes me back to the Australian Education Union report released last week on capital spending in our schools. It found that, in 2021, the amount of money spent by five elite private schools on capital works was the same amount of money that the government gave to more than half of all Australia's public schools, and, in the decade to 2021, the annual average spend on capital works per private school student was more than double what was spent on public school students. In numbers, that equates to $31 billion more being spent on private students than public students over a decade.</para>
<para>Non-government schools have been allocated $1.25 billion since 2017 in Commonwealth funds as part of a capital grants program. If this scheme remains in place, private schools will get almost another $1 billion in capital funding from the federal government over the next four years. In contrast, all the other state schools, except for in WA and the Northern Territory, will need to share a pot of $216 million for their building infrastructure program. That's 6,700 public schools that need to share that pot.</para>
<para>In summary, I will welcome the government's commitment to ensuring that in this term all schools will achieve 100 per cent of the schooling resource standard to help close this—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>E0D</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The question is that the motion be agreed to, and I call the honourable member for Reid.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SITOU</name>
    <name.id>298121</name.id>
    <electorate>Reid</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Of all the many moments that stood out after the 2022 election, there was one that stood out in particular—one that signified what the change of government really meant for Australia. The new Minister for Education, Jason Clare, returned to his primary school in south-west Sydney to visit his former primary school teacher, Cathy Fry. It was clearly an emotional moment for Mrs Fry and for Minister Clare, and, watching that video, it was an emotional moment for me too.</para>
<para>Like Minister Clare, I grew up in south-west Sydney. I too got a good education at public schools: Canley Vale Public School and Sefton High School. I was taught by dedicated teachers who extended my lessons beyond the textbooks. They made me curious about the world and made me think about my role in society. In Minister Clare, and the Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth, Anne Aly, we have two fierce advocates of the benefits of education at every stage of development. Former prime minister Paul Keating said, 'Education provides the keys to the kingdom.' It was true when he made that statement more than three decades ago and it will be even more true in the future. Consider this. Over the next 10 years, more than nine out of 10 new jobs expected to be created will require post-secondary qualifications. For the individual, for our society and for our economy, education is the key to unlocking this nation's potential.</para>
<para>We on this side of the House understand this. But understanding that isn't enough. We need vision, we need heart and we also need a plan. This government has been implementing reforms to create the better education systems that we all need. For the first time, we have a federal government that recognises the importance of education throughout someone's life, including the critical education that happens soon after birth. We have made early education more affordable. It was a key commitment in the 2022 election and it's making a difference, with an 11 per cent average reduction in out-of-pocket expenses. If the Albanese Labor government hadn't implemented this change, out-of-pocket costs for families would have increased by an average of six per cent.</para>
<para>Anyone who has a child in child care will tell you how incredible early childhood educators are. This is a government that is supporting them. We are providing early educators with the ability to negotiate for higher wages through multi-enterprise bargaining. We're also encouraging more people to choose a career in early education by providing fee-free TAFE courses.</para>
<para>As I have been meeting with teachers and principals at primary schools and high schools throughout my electorate, the key concern they have is around teacher shortage. As an example of how bad it got in 2022, in one week in one school in my electorate there were 43 classes that did haven't a dedicated teacher. That was 43 classes where students didn't get the education they needed. Things have improved since then, but teacher shortages remain for so many schools across the country. It's a problem that has been decades in the making. We are working to address it through our National Teacher Workforce Action Plan, aimed at enhancing the recruitment and retention of teachers as well as education quality. We're investing in additional university education places, a teacher workload reduction fund, professional development enhancements and scholarships aimed at encouraging diverse, high-achieving individuals into the teaching profession.</para>
<para>This week we got the final Universities Accord report, which sets out a road map over the next decade for how we can open up more opportunities for more people to get a tertiary qualification. The Minister for Education, Jason Clare, wants to see more Indigenous students, students from the bush and students from low-socioeconomic backgrounds succeed in this country. He knows the only way to do that is to ensure we reform our education system. It's a task I'm proud to support.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELL</name>
    <name.id>282981</name.id>
    <electorate>Moncrieff</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I really don't think there has been a government as full of itself as this Albanese Labor government. They love big, sweeping statements. They tell mistruths and they claim credit for simply everything. Like the member for Robertson today, I want to talk about two of these claims. The first is that their government are making a fairer education system from early childhood education right through to university. Sure, that might be so if you live in a metro area. But I've been travelling the country and speaking with families in regional and rural areas. As my colleagues here in the chamber—the member for Braddon and the member for Grey—can attest, rural and remote communities basically are not getting what they need. There is nothing fair about how this government is treating those communities. Does the member opposite think that it's fair that the rural community of Kingston SE are still waiting for the $1.8 million that Labor promised them before the 2022 federal election for their early learning centre? Does he think that's fair? Does the member think that it's fair that in Tumby Bay there is no access to ECE for families and many mothers cannot even return to work? Does the member think that it's fair that families in the electorate of Casey are waiting years before they can get their children into early learning, with 15 children for every place? Does the member think that it's fair that in the great electorates of Mallee and Grey there are childcare deserts as far as the eye can see and yet this government is doing nothing for those communities—nothing for those communities in Grey, nothing for those communities in Braddon and nothing for those communities in Casey, just to name a few? I'm sure that, if the member for Robertson took a look at his own backyard, his own electorate, he'd find that there are families struggling to access care and those families are languishing on long waitlists. They simply can't go back to work. Members opposite, tell me exactly what is fair about that.</para>
<para>Why is it that this government always leaves the regions behind? Why do they do that? I've sat at roundtables with parents in tears. They're concerned about the rising cost of living under this government and they can't return to work, because there are no childcare centres in their area or, if there are, they're a 40-kilometre trek away and they're stuck on a waiting list. I've spoken to firefighters, nurses and teachers who cannot go back to work amidst staffing shortages, because there's nowhere for their children to go under this government. How is that fair?</para>
<para>Finally, when these children make it to school, they're developmentally behind their peers because, due to where they live, they haven't had the same level of access. This government has the gall to stand here and talk about how families are better off under them. Go to the regions and say that. Visit Tumby Bay. Visit Ardrossan. Visit the South Australian regions that are missing out and tell those families that it's fair.</para>
<para>You say a family that has access to a place is one of the lucky ones, and yet, on 1 July 2023, those families watched their increased subsidy be eaten away by higher fees from their provider. But the government says that's not true. They say that families are better off. I've spoken to many who simply aren't. They are families who watched their fees increase by 15 to 20 per cent and couldn't do anything about it, because there were no other places available for their children in nearby centres. Even data from The Parenthood shows that 90 per cent of parents watched their fees increase on 1 July, and this government has done nothing about it. They threw billions of taxpayer dollars into the inflation dumpster fire and then they walked away. They simply set it and forgot it.</para>
<para>Out-of-pocket costs are already creeping back up 3.5 per cent, according to the December quarter CPI, and fees will continue to increase because centres also need to pay for the rising costs of electricity, the rising costs of gas, the rising costs of groceries and all other items that continue to rise because of the reckless spending of this Labor government—a government that can't protect the borders, a government that can't protect our community, a government that has let the economy spiral out of control because they don't understand that, the more you spend, the higher inflation soars.</para>
<para>It's clear the Albanese government has no idea what they're doing. They're falling over themselves, trying to cover all their mistakes, which are quite a list for only 18 months in government, saying that there's nothing to see here. Australian families deserve better than this reckless Labor government.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms FERNANDO</name>
    <name.id>299964</name.id>
    <electorate>Holt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I am honoured to stand before you to speak in support of this motion and highlight the remarkable achievements of the Albanese Labor government in advancing education in our great nation. Under the leadership of Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Minister for Education Jason Clare, the government has made significant strides in creating a better and fairer education system for all Australians. The electorate of Holt is one of the youngest in the nation. Over one in every four in my electorate is under the age of 14, the highest in this country. As a representative of such a young electorate, I welcome the government's plan to revitalise our teacher workforce through the National Teacher Workforce Action Plan.</para>
<para>In recognising the shortage of teachers across the country, this government has taken action to attract and retain the best talent in the education sector. Through targeted investments, the Albanese government is empowering passionate individuals to pursue careers in teaching, thereby ensuring a bright future for generations to come. The plan includes funding 4,000 additional university places in education, establishing a teacher workload reduction fund to reduce burnout, improving the professional development of teachers and increasing Commonwealth Teaching Scholarships. These reforms will help teachers across the country—like my sister-in-law Christine, a primary schoolteacher in the neighbouring electorate of La Trobe.</para>
<para>Labor's commitment to primary and secondary education extends beyond just the people involved. We understand the space where children learn plays a crucial role in shaping student success. This is why Labor is investing over $275 million through the Schools Upgrade Fund to enhance school facilities and prioritise student safety. From improving ventilation to building outdoor learning spaces, this government is creating nurturing environments where students can thrive academically and socially.</para>
<para>The pandemic was tough on our kids, who spent many of their vital years of growth separated from their peers. Through initiatives such as the Student Wellbeing Boost, the government has allocated over $200 million to support mental health and resilience in schools. This funding has enabled schools to provide crucial resources and interventions to support students during these challenging times, ensuring that no child is left behind.</para>
<para>The government is also committed to achieving full and fair funding for all schools for the first time in a decade. Currently, no school outside of the ACT is fully funded. Students, especially those from disadvantaged backgrounds, were being left behind under the previous coalition government's schools agreement. Under their plan, students from disadvantaged backgrounds—like many in my electorate—were found to be three times more likely to fall behind, and 86,000 students didn't meet either the basic literacy or numeracy standards. By working together with states and territories through the National School Reform Agreement the government has ensured that every child has access to high quality education.</para>
<para>The Albanese government has also shown an unwavering commitment to shaping the higher education system to meet the needs of the future. Yesterday marked a momentous occasion for the future of Australian higher education, with the release of the Australian Universities Accord final report by Minister Clare. The release of the report will pave the way for a more inclusive and equitable higher education landscape. The Albanese Labor government's investment in education is a testament to its unwavering commitment to build a brighter future for all Australians. Through bold initiatives and collaborative efforts, we are creating a better and fairer education system that empowers every individual to reach their full potential. As we continue to build an education system designed for the 21st century, let us reaffirm our commitment to ensuring that education remains the cornerstone of our nation's prosperity.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:53</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
    <electorate>Riverina</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The shadow minister for early childhood education and youth certainly summed it up when she talked about the failures of Labor on this particular issue. Education is so important. It is the great enabler, particularly for our young people, and Labor has let them down on their watch.</para>
<para>At the moment we have got record HECS debt. It went up seven per cent, indexed from the end of June last year. These young people are getting into the workforce. Yes, it's the best loan you can ever take, but when you combine it with the cost-of-living crisis it is so difficult for these young people. Housing affordability is going to be so much more difficult for them than for, you could perhaps argue, previous generations. The shadow minister referred to there being a childcare desert in regional areas, and she is so correct. Labor talks a big game about the affordability of child care, but it is availability in regional areas that is the crisis point. They can't find a childcare placement. I know we have listened to the health minister recently talking about how, if you can't find a bulk-billing doctor, then you should just jump on the phone and take the next available one. That could be hundreds of kilometres away for somebody who lives in a remote area or, dare I say it, a rural or regional area. And it's the same with child carers. The member for Mallee knows what I'm talking about all too well. She's all too well aware of what I'm talking about when it comes to childcare availability—not necessarily affordability but availability.</para>
<para>Under Labor we've seen savage cuts of up to $102 million to university research programs, programs that have meant such a difference. I know in my electorate, where agricultural excellence is promoted and pushed by Charles Sturt University, we can't afford to be cutting research programs. We should be doing more in the space of R&D. On the abolition under Labor of the 50 per cent pass rule, which safeguarded students from incurring debt, the question is: why has this taken place? There's now a start-up loan scheme for courses that were previously free, a student support scheme that delivers no substantive support. These things have happened on Labor's watch. There are declining standards with no solution in sight. And there was a very interesting article, promoted by both the ABC and the <inline font-style="italic">Guardian</inline> just the other day, in relation to the fact that up to a third of Australian children cannot read properly as teaching methods cause preventable tragedy. That was the Grattan Institute.</para>
<para>You talk to teachers, and they're overwhelmed by the work that they have to do. They have to be all things to all children these days. I take my hat off to our teachers. They work very hard, and they put the kids' welfare first and foremost, as they should. When only 12 per cent of Australian 15-year-olds are able to read at an advanced level, with children from poor families 10 times more likely to have deficient reading ability compared to their richer peers, you have to ask yourself: where is our country headed? Reading is of such critical importance. It doesn't matter what occupation those kids will be doing in the future. It doesn't matter whether they become an astrophysicist or if they work in manual labour, they need to be able to read and write. Under this Labor government, reading and writing standards have, sadly, slipped.</para>
<para>Labor, of course will point the finger. As so many of them do when they get their talking points, they just read them straight from the piece of paper that they've been handed. The fact remains we need to be looking after our children better. We need to be able to make sure that those educational standards are better. Indeed, the HECS debts are only going to increase with the inflationary crisis that we've got under Labor's watch. We've got the cost-of-living crisis under Labor's watch. We have a lack of childcare placements under Labor's watch. Fees have increased. Out-of-pockets costs have skyrocketed, and no additional places have been created for families when it comes to child care.</para>
<para>The education minister talks a big game on the National School Reform Agreement, but so far there's been no national agreement and no school reforms. What's the education minister doing? What's Labor doing? Life is much more costly and much harder under this government.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PAYNE</name>
    <name.id>144732</name.id>
    <electorate>Canberra</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm proud to rise to speak on this important motion brought before the House today by my colleague the member for Robertson. The motion acknowledges the strong commitment of the Albanese Labor government, led by the Minister for Education, to a fair and equitable education system from early childhood education right through to the tertiary sector. This motion comes to the House at a very timely moment, as last week we saw the handing down of the final report of the Australian Universities Accord Panel.</para>
<para>I want to congratulate the panel on their work, which lays out a comprehensive and detailed path to get our university sector back on track after a decade of coalition neglect. It outlines how the sector can better serve our nation, its staff and, most importantly, its students. It shows us how we can increase equity when it comes to higher education access for disadvantaged young Australians. It provides us with a vision for tertiary education long into the future. It is optimistic and it is ambitious.</para>
<para>The government will now consider the 47 recommendations as we create a long-term plan for reform in order to meet Australia's future skills needs. In the meantime, the government is implementing the priority actions of the accord's interim report, which delivers an additional 20 new regional universities study hubs.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>E0D</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! I thank the honourable member. The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>42</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Migration Amendment (Strengthening Employer Compliance) Bill 2023</title>
          <page.no>42</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7058" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Migration Amendment (Strengthening Employer Compliance) Bill 2023</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Assent</title>
            <page.no>42</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>MOTIONS</title>
        <page.no>42</page.no>
        <type>MOTIONS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East: Occupied Palestinian Territories</title>
          <page.no>42</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BANDT</name>
    <name.id>M3C</name.id>
    <electorate>Melbourne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the member for Melbourne moving the following motion:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That the House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that since the House of Representatives' resolution of 16 October 2023 concerning Israel and Gaza, which supported the State of Israel's looming invasion of Gaza by stating that the House 'stands with Israel', the following have occurred:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) an appalling and increasing toll of deaths and injuries caused by the State of Israel's bombing and invasion of Gaza;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) a growing humanitarian catastrophe caused by the State of Israel's blockade, bombing and invasion of Gaza; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the State of Israel is the subject of recent International Court of Justice orders in South Africa's case regarding the prevention of genocide;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) does not support the State of Israel's continued invasion of Gaza, and calls for an immediate and permanent ceasefire; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) calls on the Government to end its support for the State of Israel's invasion of Gaza.</para></quote>
<para>It is absolutely imperative that we debate today why this Labor government continues to back the State of Israel's invasion of Gaza. I want to talk about Mahmoud Fattouh, who was two months old when, in the last few days, he died of starvation in northern Gaza. The paramedics have said his mother came screaming for help, seeking medical assistance, as he appeared to take his last breath. He was on the verge of starvation. He had not had baby milk. Why had he not had baby milk? Because there is no baby milk in northern Gaza. Why? UNRWA, the aid agency, has not been able to make a delivery of food to northern Gaza since 23 January, over a month ago. The Australian government—the Labor government—has suspended UNRWA funding, making UNRWA's job even harder. In northern Gaza, like the rest of the country, deliveries of food and humanitarian assistance are being blockaded while this area is being bombed.</para>
<para>Over two million people live in Gaza—forty per cent of them are under the age of 15—and there is nowhere for them to go. It is effectively a walled-in primary school. What has happened? They have been starved. They have been dehydrated. Fuel and power have been cut off. They have been bombed and invaded, and they've been herded to the south, where an imminent assault awaits them. There are now predictions of famine and widespread disease breaking out across this region. Children are eating animal food. The hospital system is no longer functioning in large parts of Gaza. In the north of Gaza, the ambulance system has broken down, according to reports.</para>
<para>In the face of this unfolding humanitarian catastrophe, which has already seen about 30,000 people die, including Mahmoud Fattouh, what do we get from the government? We get the continued backing of the invasion and a cutting off of UNRWA's funding. As a result, this extreme war cabinet of the Israeli government, which is now subject to orders by the International Court of Justice to stop genocide, feel emboldened knowing that there's nothing they won't do before governments will step in and act. They feel they've got carte blanche. As a result, children are dying. People are dying in their thousands. We are on the verge of the humanitarian catastrophe that comes from people dying not only when bombs hit their homes and their hospitals get destroyed but also from all the diseases and starvation that come when civil society breaks down.</para>
<para>What is happening in response? The Prime Minister of Israel has said the looming invasion of Rafah will happen. It's not listening to the plaintive calls and weasel words coming from some world leaders that say they care about it but then do nothing to back it up and refuse to call for a permanent and immediate ceasefire. They know there will be no repercussions, and thousands more will continue to die. There is much more that the government should be doing. It is time, when you have a war cabinet that is now subject to orders to stop genocide, that the government impose sanctions on the members of that war cabinet. I note how quickly the government has moved to impose sanctions with respect to terrible events in and associated with Russia. And yet, there is still full backing for the invasion of Gaza. It is also the time to stop sending weapons. Stop military exports to a government that is subject to orders to stop genocide. That is the time, if there is any, to stop that. It is also the time, Labor, to restore UNRWA funding. We are seeing children dying and people running out of food and water, and UNRWA need the money to get back in there and give them the very basics of life.</para>
<para>But the bare minimum that should be able to be agreed on by everyone across this parliament is that the invasion must stop. This catastrophic loss of life must stop, and there must be an immediate and permanent ceasefire. I say to others in this parliament: whatever your position was back on 16 October when there was a vote to support the invasion—which we opposed, because you could see the looming humanitarian catastrophe that came from it—30,000 people have died. Children are dying. Mothers are giving birth and, in many instances, being subject to surgical procedures without anaesthetic, according to reports. There is looming starvation. Civil society in Gaza is breaking down. It will be children and civilians who suffer. That is part of the reason the International Court of Justice took the extraordinary step of putting orders on the Israeli government. The Israeli government fronted up and said that there is absolutely no case to answer with respect to genocide, and the International Court of Justice said, 'We disagree, and we are going to impose orders on you.' That has happened since this parliament and Labor sanctioned the invasion. That has happened. 30,000 people have been killed. Civil society is breaking down. The health system is breaking down.</para>
<para>So maybe—and I say it to other members of parliament—you have a different view about the question of genocide and what the International Court of Justice says. Maybe you have a different view about sanctions and the actions that should be taken against one of the most extreme far-right governments we have seen for some time in this Netanyahu government and its war cabinet. Maybe you disagree with all of that. What this motion is about is something very simple: do you think that right now the invasion should stop and stop permanently? There's not a weasel word. It's not a humanitarian pause so that children can be fed and then killed.</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>E0D</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order. The member for Melbourne has the call.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BANDT</name>
    <name.id>M3C</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Not a pause so that food can get in and then they can be bombed. But do you agree, right now, that the invasion should stop and should stop permanently? That is what this motion is about, and I urge everyone to understand that what we say and do here matters. This is our chance to join that growing international chorus that says, 'Enough is enough,' and we need an immediate and permanent ceasefire.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>E0D</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is there a seconder to the motion?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHANDLER-MATHER</name>
    <name.id>300121</name.id>
    <electorate>Griffith</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion. The current Australian Labor government could actually be in breach of its own obligations under the genocide convention for failing to take actions to prevent a genocide in Gaza. In fact, international lawyer Francis Boyle, when talking about Australia and the other countries that have stopped funding UNRWA—the main aid organisation in Gaza—while there is an engineered famine, said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">These States are now also directly violating Genocide Convention article 2(c) by themselves: 'Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part...'</para></quote>
<para>To be crystal clear, this means Australia, and the Labor government, could find itself before the International Court of Justice—just as Israel is right now—for its role in the genocide in Gaza.</para>
<para>As the State of Israel's mass slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza continues, with F-35 jets screeching over the heads of innocent men, women and children who far too often take their last breath as bombs rain down, and as the 1.5 million Palestinians in Rafah—the tiny area of Gaza where Israel has pushed most Palestinians—prepare for the next stage of Israel's genocide, the Australian public should know. They should know that these jets, dropping those bombs, can only function because of parts manufactured and exported from Australia with the consent of this Australian Labor government.</para>
<para>In fact, not only is Labor allowing the export of weapons to Israel; it has granted two more weapon export permits since 7 October. The latest DFAT data shows $125,000 in arms and ammunition exported to Israel in October. As Israel deliberately engineers a famine in Gaza that experts say will kill more Palestinians than the already 30,000 murdered by Israeli bombs and weapons that can only function in part as a result of Australian weapon exports, the Australian government has joined in by stopping $6 million of aid funding to UNRWA, the UN aid organisation for Palestine.</para>
<para>The head of UNRWA, Philippe Lazzarini, has said UNRWA has:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… reached breaking point, with Israel's repeated calls to dismantle UNRWA and the freezing of funding by donors at a time of unprecedented humanitarian needs in Gaza.</para></quote>
<para>UNRWA now reports it has been forced to pause aid and deliveries to northern Gaza, where it is currently not possible to conduct proper humanitarian operations. Palestinians are slowly being starved to death, and this Australian government is participating in that by pausing aid funding for UNRWA.</para>
<para>Let's think about this in the human consequences. A two-month-old Palestinian boy, Mahmoud Fattouh, has died from starvation in northern Gaza. Here's what the paramedics said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We saw a woman carrying her baby, screaming for help. Her pale baby seemed to be taking his last breath.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">We rushed him to hospital and he was found to be suffering acute malnutrition. Medical staff rushed him into the ICU. The baby has not been fed any milk for days, as baby milk is totally absent in Gaza.</para></quote>
<para>Can anyone here possibly imagine the unique horror and pain for a mum to watch their small baby slowly take their last breath as they die as a result of not having enough food to breathe?</para>
<para>What about the six-year-old Palestinian girl, Hind Rajab? To quote from the SBS:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Relatives found the body on Saturday of a 6-year-old Palestinian girl who had begged Gaza rescuers to send help after being trapped by Israeli military fire, along with the bodies of five of her family members and two ambulance workers who had gone to save her.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">…   …   …</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The audio clips released by the Red Crescent earlier this month recorded a call to dispatchers that was first made by Hind's teenage cousin … saying an Israeli tank was approaching before shots rang out and she screamed.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Believed to be the only survivor, Hind stayed on the line for three hours with dispatchers, who tried to soothe her as they prepared to send an ambulance.</para></quote>
<para>Let parliament remember her words. This is what that 6-year-old girl said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">'Come and get me,' Hind was heard crying desperately in another audio recording. 'I'm so scared, please come.'</para></quote>
<para>She was trapped in a car surrounded by her five dead family members for 12 hours after rescuers tried to send an ambulance to reach her, but it was destroyed by the IDF. These two little children's stories are just some of those of the 10,000 children who have been murdered by the Israeli genocidal actions in Gaza. This Labor government is allowing weapons to be sent to Israel. This Labor government is stopping crucial aid funding from reaching little kids like these.</para>
<para>For those watching on their phones or computers at home, it is easy to feel overwhelmed, but it is our duty to the millions of Palestinians to keep fighting. For every member of this parliament, remember that the genocide convention asks us to take actions to prevent genocide. And in a few years time ask yourselves: did you do enough? If the answer is no, let that rest on your conscience.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WATTS</name>
    <name.id>193430</name.id>
    <electorate>Gellibrand</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Since Hamas's appalling terrorist attacks of 7 October, the Australian government has taken a principled and consistent approach to this conflict. Australia is not a central player in this conflict, but we do have a respected voice and we've used it with countries who have influence in the region to pursue our objectives. We've used our voice to advocate for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire, humanitarian access, the release of hostages and the protection of civilians.</para>
<para>This conflict has touched so many Australians. Australians in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories during this conflict have obviously been directly affected. But many more Australians have been directly connected to this conflict through the constant stream of horrifying messages and images shared directly from this conflict. There has been so much suffering in this conflict and so much trauma in our own community. We mourn for the horrifying loss of innocent civilian life that we have witnessed. We also know that so many lives remain in the balance, and that's why we've committed $46.5 million in humanitarian assistance to the region since October 7—an amount that that will be delivered in full.</para>
<para>The United Nations has reported that 400,000 Palestinians in Gaza are starving and one million 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. There remain potentially 130 hostages who are being held by the terrorist group Hamas. In this context, this motion calls for a ceasefire in the conflict, and the international community has been crystal clear. At the United Nations in December of last year 153 countries, including Australia, voted in support of a humanitarian ceasefire. A deal must be struck. It's how parties can move towards a sustainable ceasefire and a diplomatic pathway out of this conflict.</para>
<para>The Australian government strongly supports efforts to broker an extended cessation in hostilities. We welcome US Secretary of State Antony Blinken's recent comment that he believes that there remains 'space for an agreement to be reached', and we expect parties to engage in good faith towards this goal.</para>
<para>We know that Hamas violated the terms of the last agreement, and we know also that inflammatory rhetoric from some members of the Israeli government has been unhelpful. Ultimately, the only way out of this conflict is through a two-state solution. The question the international community is trying to answer is: how can responsible countries encourage a pathway out of this conflict towards a lasting peace? We see that in the comments of both US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and UK foreign secretary David Cameron. A lasting peace requires a two-state solution: an Israeli state alongside a Palestinian state. It requires all parties to respect the right of others to exist.</para>
<para>We've always said that we will be guided by the principle of advancing the cause of peace and progress towards a just and enduring two-state solution. We can't assure Israel's legitimate aspirations without also enabling legitimate Palestinian aspirations for their own state. Achieving this feels further away than it has at any other time in my lifetime, but it's the only way out of this conflict. It will require extraordinary efforts of peace-building from Israelis and Palestinians, which are supported by the good-faith efforts of the international community.</para>
<para>Unfortunately we're not seeing that good faith support for peace-building being modelled by political actors in Australia. We saw, under the previous government, how using international relations to play domestic partisan politics hurt the Australian national interest. Regrettably, we're seeing this again, through the behaviour of the Leader of the Opposition and the Greens. The Leader of the Opposition and the Greens want to whip up anger and fear in the Australian community because they think that there are votes in it for them. 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 united. Instead they would rather see our community divided, to pick off votes. We have to safeguard a peaceful dialogue in our community and work to make Australia more united, rather than seek to divide Australians. We need to be looking for common ground and building from that, rather than seeking to divide.</para>
<para>Greens activists don't like their actions being equating to those of the Leader of the Opposition, but look at this motion. The only words of the 16-part resolution of this House passed on 16 October last year and quoted in today's Greens motion is that the House 'stands with Israel'. Is it unusual for a resolution of this House, following an appalling terrorist attack, to express solidarity and sympathy with the victims of an attack? Of course not. It's a basic act of common humanity that this House has expressed repeatedly in the past in the face of other terrorist atrocities. After Al Qaeda's terrorist attacks on the United States on 11 September 2001, the resolution of this House provided that the House:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… conveys to the Government and people of the United States of America the deepest sympathy and sense of shared loss felt by the Government and people of Australia …</para></quote>
<para>After an Australian white nationalist terrorist attack in Christchurch, the resolution of this House expressed:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… our solidarity with the Muslim community of Christchurch, New Zealand and our own nation at this time of affliction …</para></quote>
<para>There's nothing unusual with expressing solidarity with a nation that's been a victim of a terrorist attack.</para>
<para>Despite this, those are the only three words in the 351-word 16-part resolution of the House that the Greens seem to recognise. Why doesn't this suspension motion recognise that parliament's resolution of 16 October also affirmed that the House:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(6) acknowledges the devastating loss of Israeli and Palestinian life and that innocent civilians on all sides are suffering as a result of the attacks by Hamas and the subsequent conflict;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(7) supports justice and freedom for Israelis and Palestinians alike;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(8) supports international efforts to establish and maintain humanitarian access into Gaza, including safe passage for civilians;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(9) reiterates Australia's consistent position in all contexts is to call for the protection of civilian lives and the observance of international law;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(10) supports Australia's engagement with countries in the Middle East and beyond, at all levels, in support of the protection of civilians, and the containment of the conflict …</para></quote>
<para>The reason that all non-Greens MPs supported this motion on 16 October is that the motion encompassed all dimensions of this conflict in a principled way. But the Greens voted against it because, for them, differentiation is the point. They don't see the benefit of a joint statement of solidarity for Israelis, Palestinians and Australians alike caught up in this conflict. They still cannot bring themselves, even today, to refer to the innocent hostages still held by Hamas in this conflict. They don't want to look for common ground in challenging times; they want to look for differentiation for their own political campaign.</para>
<para>The Greens have ignored this part of the resolution of the House on 16 October ever since because it complicates their political narrative. They ignore it because it undermines the Greens political strategy of looking for division for political gain, rather than unity for the benefit of the Australian community and those seeking to resolve the conflict in the Middle East. They want to confect a vision and stoke conflict, instead of trying to find common ground to build out from. They want to sow misinformation instead of facilitating a fact based debate.</para>
<para>As I indicated earlier, there are so many people of goodwill in our community who feel intensely moved by this conflict. I've had so many conversations with members of my own community about this. Their views are often diverse and complex. There are many Australians who feel intensely invested in this conflict and have firmly held views. There are many more Australians I've spoken to who are horrified at the terrorist attacks, appalled by the loss of innocent civilian life, but don't feel like they fully understand the conflict and are reluctant to engage for fear of saying the wrong thing and being shouted down by those who disagree. The Greens exploit all of these people of goodwill, with bad faith political ploys like this motion.</para>
<para>The way we talk about and debate these incredibly serious and consequential issues matters for the Australian community. As the House affirmed in its resolution of 16 October:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… what has unfolded is deeply distressing for many in the Australian community, close to the heart of many, and it is important that we maintain respect for each other here at home as people express their views …</para></quote>
<para>Further, it affirmed:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… undermining social cohesion and unity by stoking fear and division risks Australia's domestic security …</para></quote>
<para>I call on the Greens and the Leader of the Opposition to recognise the importance of social cohesion and national unity and engage in this debate with respect for our fellow Australians.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FLETCHER</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
    <electorate>Bradfield</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to indicate that the opposition will be voting against this motion. In this place we should value the lives of all innocent civilians, including innocent Israeli civilians and innocent Palestinian civilians. In this place we should support the two-state solution and the desire of all fair minded observers for a lasting peace and the existence of two states. But it is quite remarkable that the Greens continue to pursue a narrative in relation to the events currently unfolding which entirely ignores and airbrushes away the horrors of the 7 October terrorist attack upon Israel committed by the appalling terrorist organisation Hamas—a shocking and violent attack in which innocent and unarmed men, women and children were killed, injured and taken hostage. The depraved and horrific nature of this violence, including sexual violence and deliberate harm to young children, is sickening, and yet the Greens again move a motion which is completely silent about the fact of that appalling terrorist attack having occurred. They completely fail to mention in this motion that there remain Israeli citizens being held hostage in Gaza by the terrorist thugs of Hamas. Indeed, they continue to completely ignore the existence of Hamas. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question before the House is a motion to suspend standing orders.</para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
          <division.header>
            <body>
              <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [12:30] <br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick) </p>
            </body>
          </division.header>
          <division.data>
            <ayes>
              <num.votes>6</num.votes>
              <title>AYES</title>
              <names>
                <name>Bandt, A. P.</name>
                <name>Bates, S. J. (Teller)</name>
                <name>Chandler-Mather, M. (Teller)</name>
                <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                <name>Wilkie, A. D.</name>
              </names>
            </ayes>
            <noes>
              <num.votes>77</num.votes>
              <title>NOES</title>
              <names>
                <name>Ananda-Rajah, M.</name>
                <name>Andrews, K. L.</name>
                <name>Bell, A. M.</name>
                <name>Birrell, S. J.</name>
                <name>Boyce, C. E.</name>
                <name>Broadbent, R. E.</name>
                <name>Buchholz, S.</name>
                <name>Burns, J.</name>
                <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                <name>Caldwell, C. M.</name>
                <name>Chester, D. J.</name>
                <name>Chesters, L. M.</name>
                <name>Dutton, P. C.</name>
                <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                <name>Fernando, C.</name>
                <name>Fletcher, P. W.</name>
                <name>Freelander, M. R.</name>
                <name>Gee, A. R.</name>
                <name>Gillespie, D. A.</name>
                <name>Gosling, L. J.</name>
                <name>Hamilton, G. R.</name>
                <name>Hastie, A. W.</name>
                <name>Hawke, A. G.</name>
                <name>Hogan, K. J.</name>
                <name>Howarth, L. R.</name>
                <name>Jones, S. P.</name>
                <name>Katter, R. C.</name>
                <name>Landry, M. L.</name>
                <name>Lawrence, T. N.</name>
                <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                <name>Ley, S. P.</name>
                <name>Littleproud, D.</name>
                <name>Marino, N. B.</name>
                <name>McBride, E. M.</name>
                <name>McCormack, M. F.</name>
                <name>McIntosh, M. I.</name>
                <name>McKenzie, Z. A.</name>
                <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                <name>Mitchell, B. K.</name>
                <name>Mitchell, R. G.</name>
                <name>Morrison, S. J.</name>
                <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                <name>O'Brien, E. L.</name>
                <name>O'Brien, L. S.</name>
                <name>Pasin, A.</name>
                <name>Pearce, G. B.</name>
                <name>Phillips, F. E.</name>
                <name>Pike, H. J.</name>
                <name>Pitt, K. J.</name>
                <name>Price, M. L.</name>
                <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                <name>Ramsey, R. E. (Teller)</name>
                <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                <name>Sharkie, R. C. C.</name>
                <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                <name>Smith, D. P. B. (Teller)</name>
                <name>Spender, A. M.</name>
                <name>Stevens, J.</name>
                <name>Sukkar, M. S.</name>
                <name>Swanson, M. J.</name>
                <name>Taylor, A. J.</name>
                <name>Tehan, D. T.</name>
                <name>Thistlethwaite, M. J.</name>
                <name>Thompson, P.</name>
                <name>van Manen, A. J.</name>
                <name>Vasta, R. X.</name>
                <name>Violi, A. A.</name>
                <name>Wallace, A. B.</name>
                <name>Ware, J. L.</name>
                <name>Watts, T. G.</name>
                <name>Webster, A. E.</name>
                <name>Willcox, A. J.</name>
                <name>Wilson, R. J.</name>
                <name>Wolahan, K.</name>
                <name>Young, T. J.</name>
              </names>
            </noes>
            <pairs>
              <num.votes>0</num.votes>
              <title>PAIRS</title>
              <names />
            </pairs>
          </division.data>
          <division.result>
            <body>
              <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question negatived.</p>
            </body>
          </division.result>
        </division></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>47</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Help to Buy Bill 2023, Help to Buy (Consequential Provisions) Bill 2023</title>
          <page.no>47</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <p>
              <a href="r7123" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Help to Buy Bill 2023</span>
                </p>
              </a>
            </p>
            <a href="r7124" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Help to Buy (Consequential Provisions) Bill 2023</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>47</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BRIAN MITCHELL</name>
    <name.id>129164</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyons</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today we're talking about more than just the intricacies of policy and legislation. The Help to Buy Bill 2023 and the Help to Buy (Consequential Provisions) Bill 2023 we have before the House are about a commitment to transform lives and empower the return of the Aussie dream of home ownership to a new generation of Australians. It hails from a promise made and a commitment now kept.</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government understands safe and affordable housing is central to the security and dignity of all Australians. Sadly, too many Australians cannot find an affordable place to buy. Rising interest rates have been difficult for those with a mortgage, and the rental market remains very tight, with low vacancy rates and high rents across Australia. That's why our government has committed to an ambitious housing reform agenda to boost the supply of all housing, more public and social housing, more affordable housing, more homes to rent and more homes to buy. Help to Buy is an initiative to get more Australians into home ownership, bridging the gap between aspiration and reality.</para>
<para>At the 2022 election, the Australian Labor Party made a vow to confront the hurdles faced by many people working hard to own their own homes, and every day since we have sought to honour that vow. Help to Buy is simple and elegant. At its heart is shared equity between the Commonwealth and mortgagee, bringing down what can be crippling upfront costs, including what can be crippling mortgage insurance.</para>
<para>In simple terms, lenders mortgage insurance protects banks from financial loss if the home owner can't afford to meet their home loan repayments. However, it doesn't protect the mortgagee. Generally, a lender will take out LMI when a home loan deposit is less than 20 per cent of the total value of the property. This is an upfront cost that potential home buyers need to save for on top of their deposit and it can run into the tens of thousands of dollars. On a $450,000 property, for example, if you've saved $45,000 for a 10 per cent deposit, you're still looking at needing another $8,000 for the LMI. If you've saved just a five per cent deposit, the LMI cost is closer to $15,000. Help to Buy will bring down these upfront costs, supporting up to 40,000 low- and middle-income Australian households to purchase a home of their own. Forty-thousand people is a population about twice the size of Burnie in Tasmania. This will bring homeownership back into reach for thousands of Australians, including renters who have been locked out of the housing market. Under this legislation, the Commonwealth will contribute up to 40 per cent in equity for new homes and 30 per cent for existing homes, allowing people to get their foot in the door of homeownership. It unlocks doors that have previously been slammed shut, particularly for young people. This shared-equity initiative ensures participants can enter the realm of homeownership with perhaps as little as a two per cent deposit. We know that saving for a deposit at a time when house prices are at record highs is a never-ending cycle with always-moving goal posts. By sharing ownership with the Commonwealth, participants will have lower ongoing repayments.</para>
<para>The commitment to Help to Buy from all states at the National Cabinet last August signifies a collective Australian effort amongst the federal government, the states and the territories to progress this legislation. I must acknowledge here my colleague the Minister for Housing—who is from Tasmania—Julie Collins. Her tireless work to deliver significant housing reforms is ensuring more Australians have a safe and affordable place to call home. Under the member for Franklin's leadership, our government is developing a new National Housing and Homelessness Plan, a 10-year strategy to help more Australians access safe and affordable housing. This plan will set out a national vision across the responsibilities of different levels of government to help guide future housing and homelessness policy, considering the full spectrum of housing and homelessness challenges, from homelessness to homeownership.</para>
<para>Importantly, Help to Buy is just one element of the government's commitment to improving housing affordability, including, of course, the $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund, the $3 billion Social Housing Accelerator Payment and the largest increase to Commonwealth Rent Assistance in 30 years. Further, the Labor government's expanded and improved Home Guarantee Scheme has now passed the milestone of 100,000 people helped into homeownership. The Home Guarantee Scheme gives eligible first-home buyers and single parents support to purchase a home sooner by reducing the deposit they need to save to buy a house. Income thresholds for this scheme are $125,000 for singles and $200,000 for joint applicants. Through this initiative, the Albanese government has helped more than 1,300 Tasmanians into homeownership since the Labor government came to power.</para>
<para>Our government understands the housing challenges that we are facing did not happen overnight, and they cannot be solved overnight nor by one level of government alone. The Albanese government is working with states, territories and local governments to deliver better housing outcomes all across the country. This includes work being delivered through National Cabinet to provide a more secure and affordable housing supply. For example, the National Housing Accord Facility supports planning and zoning reforms and is investing $350 million in additional federal funding to deliver 10,000 affordable rental homes over five years from 2024, matched by the states and territories. There is federal funding of $2 billion through the Social Housing Accelerator to deliver around 4,000 new social rental homes across Australia. And there is a $500 million housing support program for initiatives to help kickstart housing supply, including by connecting essential services and amenities to support new housing development or by building planning capability.</para>
<para>Help to Buy is about taking the stress and difficulty out of homeownership as much as possible. Ten thousand places will be available each year for four years. Places will be allocated to participating states and territories initially on a per capita basis. This initiative is aimed at supporting low- to middle-income households into homeownership, with income caps at $90,000 for singles and $120,000 for joint applicants. In Tassie's capital city, Help to Buy participants will be able to purchase a property up to $600,000 and, for Tasmanians outside Hobart, participants will be able to purchase a property up to $450,000. Let's look at this in practical terms for a moment. In my electorate, 15 per cent of workers are employed in the healthcare industry. Under Help to Buy, a nurse on the median weekly household income of around $1,200 a week looking to buy a $450,000 home will need only a two per cent deposit of $9,000. It's not insignificant, but it is vastly more achievable than aiming to save a 20 per cent deposit of $90,000 or even a 10 per cent deposit of $45,000. This means Help to Buy participants, whether a nurse from New Norfolk, a truckie from Triabunna, builder from Brighton or a machine operator from Maydena, can buy a home with a smaller deposit, a smaller mortgage and smaller mortgage repayments. I know critics of the scheme say, 'If you allow people to buy homes with less of a deposit, will they really be able to afford the home?' I ask those critics to look at the rent that people are paying. People are paying rent sometimes well in excess of what these mortgage repayments would be.</para>
<para>Most people will one day want to own their own property without government as an equity partner. We understand that. When the time comes, it will be as simple as buying the government out of its share or one day selling that property and repaying the government for its equity percentage and then using the proceeds for a standalone deposit. This is not the only answer to homeownership but it is one of the answers to increasing homeownership and helping people, particularly young people and low- and middle-income people, get on the rung of the ladder of homeownership.</para>
<para>Despite the support for Help to Buy nationally, the coalition is sadly opposing it and the Greens, as usual, want to use it as a hostage for their own agenda. The respective positions of the Liberals and the Greens unfortunately put political gains before the interests of 40,000 aspiring Australian homeowners. The member for Deakin spouted his usual negativity a fortnight ago, starting a fear campaign that this bill is unnecessary or that we will force people to sell their homes if their circumstances change. The government offered the member for Deakin a meeting to discuss his concerns, but I'm advised we received no response. We've had silence from the member for Deakin, which is not what we are usually subjected to in question time, I must say!</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Hill</name>
    <name.id>86256</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It's true!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BRIAN MITCHELL</name>
    <name.id>129164</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I know. It would be helpful if he were. The Greens and the Liberals need to stop standing in the way of first home buyers getting on that first step of the homeownership ladder. I implore them to do the right thing and get behind this bill.</para>
<para>Our government is committed to putting more Australians into their own homes. Help to Buy will bring homeownership back into reach for 40,000 Australians, providing a pathway for those who have so far been locked out. Australia's housing challenges are serious. They haven't built up overnight. It's taken some time. But we have to face the reality of where we are now. For too many Australians—too many young Australians and too many Australians on low and middle incomes—that Aussie dream is just that, a dream. We want to change that. We want to change the dream into reality. We are serious about addressing this. The Albanese Labor government has a laser focus on delivering more homes for more Australians. In 2024 we will be delivering more—more help for homebuyers, more help for renters and more help for Australians needing a safe place to call home. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SPENDER</name>
    <name.id>286042</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The crisis in housing affordability is one of the biggest challenges facing Australia today. Since I was elected, there has been no issue that has been raised with me by more people more often. Young people worry about whether they will ever own a home, older people worry that they are one rent hike away from homelessness and many, many parents worry that their children will never have stable homes either as owners or as renters and that this will be an obstacle to them having families of their own as well.</para>
<para>Wentworth is a very expensive part of the country. It puts huge pressure on people in the area who might be well off by national standards but struggle with the local cost of living. I think of one young man from Wentworth who recently approached me to say that he'd done everything he thought he was meant to do. He'd worked hard at school, he went to university, he worked hard at university and he got a good job. He now has a $50,000 HECS debt and is struggling to make his rent and has no vision at all of his own ability to ever have home security or own a home. He's not alone. Too many struggle to secure an affordable home close to their families, their friends, their support networks, where they grew up and where they want to raise their kids. Many residents worry that rising prices mean our communities are becoming less diverse and there are fewer opportunities for people on moderate or low incomes, key workers or migrants to make their homes in Wentworth.</para>
<para>But it's not just Wentworth where people are struggling. This is a national issue, and it requires a national solution. According to Demographia, the typical Sydney property costs 11 times the median wage. Ours is the second most expensive property market in the world. In the time it takes a young person to purchase a property in Sydney, they could have purchased two properties in Canada or the UK. This is why the proportion of young people renting has increased by more than 10 per cent in the last two decades. It is no wonder that affordability has gone from being a concern to an absolute crisis. Real action is long overdue.</para>
<para>I welcome the government's actions with this bill, the Help to Buy Bill 2023, and other policies to try and address the crisis. Help to Buy is a shared-equity scheme that will enable governments to support low-income workers, particularly those who struggle to save for a deposit, into homeownership. It could be a very valuable source of support for those who are in desperate need of assistance and so I will be supporting the bill. But I have concerns: the first relates to eligibility, the second to parliamentary oversight and the third to housing policy more broadly.</para>
<para>On eligibility, the government has not formally released the income thresholds or price caps which will apply to the scheme. The policy which they took to the 2022 election included an annual income threshold of $90,000 for individuals and $120,000 for couples. It is appropriate for the scheme to include income caps, but these thresholds will mean that some of the support will go to middle-income earners when I believe it could be better targeted to where the affordability crisis is most acute. In contrast, the Grattan Institute recommended income thresholds of $60,000 for individuals and $90,000 for couples. The Grattan model explicitly targeted support to low-income earners, particularly older single women who would otherwise not be able to afford a home and run the risk of retiring in poverty. The government's position is that the property price caps will be set low enough to deter those on high incomes from taking advantage of the scheme. I'm not sure if I share that optimism. It is likely the program will be oversubscribed, but nothing in the government's materials explains how they will choose between eligible applicants. Who will get priority? We have no idea.</para>
<para>On oversight, this is a broader issue. This legislation is, frankly, just an implementation framework which enables the government to engage with state governments. I appreciate the legal and constitutional necessity for this, but I am very concerned that the legislation will circumvent the proper role of parliament. We are being asked to support a scheme without any detail of how it will operate, who will benefit, how it will be managed or what information will be published about how the scheme is working. This, of course, provides the minister with the flexibility to negotiate with the states as she sees fit, but it also provides the minister with a substantial degree of freedom without parliamentary oversight. It is particularly concerning that the minister is able to issue directions to the board which could include income thresholds, investment amounts, property price caps, the number of properties, reporting obligations and virtually anything else without parliament's approval or the ability of parliament to disallow any directions which are unreasonable, unfair or excessive. The only limitation placed on these directions is that the minister cannot direct the board to enter into particular arrangements or support particular properties or individuals. I feel this is absolutely and grossly inadequate for a scheme which will invest, potentially, more than $20 billion worth of public money. No minister should have such broad discretion over such a huge sum of money. It is not clear why the bill explicitly removes the ability of parliament to disallow the minister's directions.</para>
<para>I note that, in opposition, Labor repeatedly raised concerns over the finance minister's discretion to spend billions of dollars during COVID. In response to this pressure, the previous government agreed to weekly reporting, opposition approval for significant expenditure, a rolling Senate inquiry and an independent review by the Auditor-General. Those controls are not suitable for this scheme, but it does demonstrate Labor's par support for the principles of oversight and transparency, as does Labor's voting to disallow similar instruments when in opposition, such as the former energy minister's changes to the Clean Energy Finance Corporation's investment mandate in 2021. I will therefore be moving a consideration-in-detail amendment which restores the disallowability of the minister's directions. I hope members will seriously think about whether any minister should have so much power over so much money without parliamentary oversight.</para>
<para>Finally, my third concern is with housing policy in general. I broadly support the direction of where the government has been going on housing supply—increased rental assistance, shared equity, social housing and tenant rights. These actions will make a difference to the lives of people who are struggling with housing affordability, but I am absolutely frustrated with the speed of reform and the refusal to consider other areas which are really critical as well. Housing affordability is not an abstract, long-term challenge that requires action today to avert a crisis tomorrow; it already is a crisis. We should have acted in the last two decades to deal with these problems, and every federal government and every state government in this land, and also the local governments, bear some responsibility for the situation that we are in right now.</para>
<para>This is why we need to act quickly now, particularly in implementing planning and zoning reforms that would improve housing supply and therefore affordability. This is because of the long lead times associated with housing development and construction. Reforms today may not deliver more supply for years to come, and we can't afford to waste weeks or months working through bureaucratic processes. Until we can deliver those changes, we should be really focused on renters and how we can give renters what they need, which right now is more security in maintaining their tenancies, protection against unreasonable or frequent rent hikes, and providing opportunities to enter into secure, long-term leases.</para>
<para>Renting has changed in this country. Previously, this was something that young people did for a period of time before they started in homeownership. As I've already indicated, 10 per cent more young people under the age of 35, and now also young people under the age of 45, are renting because they cannot get into homeownership. Fifty per cent of single-parent families rent. That's 50 per cent of single-parent families who need that certainty about whether they're going to be near schools, whether they're going to be near child care and whether they're going to be near the parent they're trying to share the care of their children with. Currently, tenants do not have the protections that they need. We need significant changes at the state level to enable long-term leases to give renters security, so that they know where they're going to be for those critical, primary-school years and so their kids have that same sense of security. I know the government is taking action and talking to the states on this, and I'm here to urge the government to move much faster and to put more pressure on the states on these issues, because they are absolutely critical.</para>
<para>I'm also frustrated that the government has shown so little interest in supporting a reform that would make a real difference to housing affordability: replacing stamp duty with land tax. It is a reform which needs to be carefully designed so it does not disadvantage low-income people or those who have recently paid huge sums in stamp duty, but the economic benefits of abolishing stamp duty are abundantly clear. It's not just economics; it's the lives of Australians who want to get into homeownership and are absolutely locked out because of the current regime.</para>
<para>Stamp duty is an enormous barrier to homeownership. According to e61, stamp duty now accounts for five months of a purchaser's after-tax income. That's five months of pay that they must give to the government if they want to buy a home. Abolishing stamp duty would remove a significant barrier to homeownership. It would also remove a barrier to people moving home, either to a property which better suits their circumstances—such as young people getting into a larger home as they start having children, or older people moving into a smaller home as their children move out and start their own lives—or to pursue new career opportunities.</para>
<para>It's also unfair. If you are someone who has to move for work and so you have to sell one house to move to another area and buy another house there, you might be paying twice or three times the amount of tax paid by somebody who gets to stay in one place. Is that fair? You haven't had more homes. You've had to move, and so you're being taxed for that desire to move and to move around. When we think of issues such as the lack of key skills in regional areas—doctors and nurses, for example—the disincentives are huge because, if they want to move to a regional area and buy a house in a regional area, they will have to pay the stamp duty. It just creates more and more barriers for people to move where they need to.</para>
<para>The high level of stamp duty also means that it's harder for young people who are buying their first or second home to buy the right home. Because they're so conscious of stamp duty, they can overextend themselves, saying, 'I don't need three bedrooms now, but, if I buy a two-bedroom now and in four years time I need another bedroom, I'll have to pay more stamp duty, so let's go further now.' It means they are putting more pressure on themselves financially, when they can't necessarily afford it, just because of the tax system—the tax system that is not working.</para>
<para>If we could transition from stamp duty to land tax, it would complement planning reforms and it would create incentives to get more properties onto the market which can be bettered matched with residents or redeveloped to produce more supply. New South Wales Treasury estimates that replacing stamp duty with land tax would lead to a 6.6 per cent increase in homeownership in that state. That is moving more than 300,000 people from rented properties into their own homes. It is huge. There are few other policies in the country which would have such a large impact on housing affordability or improving the quality of people's lives.</para>
<para>The challenge for state governments is that the transition entails a temporary deferral of revenue—billions of dollars which are put off to future years—which needs to be borrowed to continue financing state government functions. Given that this reform would create significant fiscal benefits for the Commonwealth through increased economic activity, raising personal income and company tax receipts, and, given the Commonwealth's lower borrowing costs, it is appropriate for the Commonwealth to underwrite the states in making this transition. It would remove one of the key barriers to state governments embracing a reform that will benefit their residents and their own budgets. It is something I hope the government embraces in this year's budget.</para>
<para>Notwithstanding my concerns, I am a supporter of the Help to Buy scheme and the government's housing agenda more broadly, and I look forward to voting in favour of it and similar legislation in the future.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SITOU</name>
    <name.id>298121</name.id>
    <electorate>Reid</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>When my parents purchased their first home in south-west Sydney four decades ago, they had only been in Australia for five years. They both worked in factories and didn't earn much, but they worked hard and were able to save up to buy a three-bedroom townhouse that they still live in today. I think it's testament to the egalitarian spirit of the eighties in Australia that, if you worked hard, you could build a life here—that two new migrants who had little formal education and spoke very little English could set down roots and buy a home to raise their children.</para>
<para>In the early 1980s, when my parents were buying their first home, the median house price in Sydney was just under $79,000, equating to about four times a typical full-time salary. Three decades later, when my husband and I were buying our first home, the median house price in Sydney had risen to $700,000, equating to about nine times the typical full-time salary. The first home my husband and I purchased was nowhere near the median house price. It was a tiny one-bedroom shoebox apartment in Homebush West. It was all we could afford at the time, but even that purchase was a stretch for us. We had saved and saved but still fell short of the 20 per cent deposit. Thankfully, our parents were able to lend us the rest. We, like so many other Sydneysiders looking to buy their first home, had to dip into the bank of mum and dad.</para>
<para>Around 15 years later, the median house price in Sydney is now around $1.5 million, equating to 12 times the average wage. In the four decades since my parents bought their first home, the same house in Sydney has gone from costing four times the average wage to costing 12 times the average wage. Because of the meteoric rise in property prices, we are having to work harder and earn more than our parents' generation in order to purchase a home. For some, it means that the idea of owning a home is not an aspirational goal but an unattainable pipedream.</para>
<para>Housing affordability is an issue I care deeply about. Having a place to call home provided me a sense of security and community when I was growing up. It's what my husband and I hope to build for our son, and it's what so many households want in my electorate of Reid. Unfortunately, for nine years we had a government that refused to make the substantial policy changes needed to address housing affordability. I'm proud to be part of an Albanese Labor government that is tackling the issue of housing head on. It was a key election commitment for us in 2022, and now we are delivering on those commitments.</para>
<para>The Help to Buy policy is an important step towards helping homebuyers, but it isn't the only thing we're doing. We came to office in 2022 with a broad housing agenda. We want to provide more safe and affordable homes for more Australians. After nine years of neglect from those opposite, this is a government that is finally showing leadership when it comes to housing, and we are tackling it from four different angles. Firstly, we are providing direct assistance to help the most vulnerable by increasing rent assistance by 15 per cent, the largest increase in more than 30 years. We've also established the Housing Australia Future Fund to build the social and affordable housing Australia needs. That $10 billion fund is now set up and taking applications. Through the National Housing Accord, we are supporting 10,000 affordable rental homes over five years.</para>
<para>The other way we are tackling housing affordability is by increasing housing supply. We are working with state governments through the housing accord to set a national target to build 1.2 million more homes over the next five years. We've committed $3 billion to the new homes bonus and $500 million to the Housing Support Program to incentivise local and state governments to build more homes more quickly. We are investing an additional $1 billion in the National Housing Infrastructure Facility to support building more homes. I'm pleased to see up to $575 million in funding has already been unlocked, with homes under construction across the country. To help renters, we've introduced new incentives to boost the supply of rental housing by changing arrangements for investments in build-to-rent accommodation.</para>
<para>Part of the reason housing affordability has remained an intractable problem for nine years is that it's a wicked challenge that requires three levels of government to work together. Yet those opposite showed a complete disinterest in taking national leadership when it comes to housing policy. For the past nine years housing policy and funding has been fragmented, piecemeal and woefully inadequate, and generations of Australians are paying the price. This is the third area in which the Albanese Labor government is bringing in reform: at last we have a federal government that is showing leadership on housing.</para>
<para>Minister for Housing, Julie Collins, convened the first National Housing Supply and Affordability Council to provide evidence based recommendations to inform all governments on how to improve housing supply and affordability. She also convened the first housing ministers meeting in five years, bringing together federal, state and territory housing ministers. It's extraordinary to think that the previous Minister for Housing, the member for Deakin, in all his time as housing minister, did not convene a meeting of state and territory housing ministers. The issue of housing affordability has been brewing for years and years. It's complex, involving local council development approvals, state and territory planning policies and supporting infrastructure projects, and yet the member for Deakin could not bring himself to get everyone together to establish a national housing plan.</para>
<para>Finally, the fourth angle from which we are tackling the housing crisis is our assistance for first-home buyers. We have expanded the Home Guarantee Scheme, which has already helped 86,000 people across Australia into homeownership. Under this scheme, eligible homebuyers are able to buy a home with as little as a five per cent deposit rather than the standard 20 per cent deposit.</para>
<para>We are also providing assistance to first-home buyers through the Help to Buy scheme, which is the bill before the parliament today. Help to Buy is the first national shared-equity scheme of its kind. It helps Australians get their feet on the housing ladder by reducing the amount required for both the saving of a deposit and the servicing of a mortgage. The government will loan applicants part of the upfront purchase price of a new home—either 30 per cent for an existing property or 40 per cent for a new build. Participants will require a two per cent deposit to access the scheme, making it significantly more affordable for participants. Forty thousand eligible participants will be able to access the scheme alongside a standard mortgage. This equity contribution ensures the sustainability of the program while offering lower ongoing mortgage repayments for individual participants. This scheme will be targeted at middle- and low-income Australians who might not otherwise be able to get a foot on the housing ladder.</para>
<para>Now, there's been some disappointing opposition to this bill. From those opposite we get their one big idea for housing affordability: to get a generation of young people to sacrifice their future by accessing superannuation early. This is yet another step in their ideological obsession with opposing superannuation. They have never supported superannuation and have never quite got their head around the fact that it is a retirement income, not a bank that you can dip into whenever you need. It's a system that is the envy of the world, and yet those opposite are obsessed with undermining it. To make things worse, the coalition's plan has been uniformly canned by housing, finance and economics experts. In fact, they say, the coalition's solution will make housing affordability worse by driving up demand.</para>
<para>In Australia we like big nation-building projects: Snowy Hydro, the Sydney Harbour Bridge, projects that define and shape our nation for decades to come. I think housing should be our next nation-building project. Unlike those opposite, this is a government with an ambitious plan to do just that. We are tackling housing affordability head on by increasing supply, providing direct assistance to vulnerable groups and first-home buyers and providing the institutional reform so sorely needed. These are the changes that are needed to shape our country to ensure more Australians have a place to call home.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CHANEY</name>
    <name.id>300006</name.id>
    <electorate>Curtin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It goes without saying that access to housing is one of the most concerning issues for Australians today. Every day, we hear about the rising cost of property, the impossibility of finding affordable rentals and the fear of never being able to afford to own a home. It's affecting our kids and grandkids disproportionately. It was raised with me last week at UWA O-day by uni students who lament the fact that they can't see a pathway to homeownership for themselves personally. I hear from parents and grandparents who can see that their children and grandchildren will not have the security of homeownership that they enjoyed without their financial support, and even then they won't be able to live anywhere near them.</para>
<para>Put simply: housing prices are too high. Housing prices have increased from three to four times the average income to seven to eight times the average income since 2000. Australian is the third-least populated country on earth but contains second-most expensive housing. These exorbitant costs exacerbate inequality and undermine social cohesion. This phenomenon redistributes rather than creates wealth. Australians' wealth is now tied up in an unproductive asset, making it bad for intergenerational fairness and bad for the productivity of our economy.</para>
<para>A 2023 Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute report notes that some young people simply will not attain homeownership over their life cycle, particularly if they're first home buyers who are unable to clear the ever-growing hurdle of saving for a deposit. It will keep getting worse for every generation unless government policies change. Alan Kohler recently summarised the Australian housing situation as high demand which is impacted by interest rates; immigration; tax breaks for investors and homeowners; grants to first home buyers; and suppressed supply by social housing, underinvestment, sprawl and planning.</para>
<para>I acknowledge that the government is making some attempts to address housing issues at a national level. In attempts to boost supply, last year this parliament passed the Housing Australia Future Fund, which I supported while noting that a lot of work still needs to be done. The government has also increased funding for the National Housing Accord and the Social Housing Accelerator and has introduced incentives to boost the supply of rental housing by changing arrangements for investors in build-to-rent accommodation. Increasing housing supply is essential and more needs to be done to achieve it.</para>
<para>Acknowledging the magnitude of this crisis and the number of people affected, last year I held two community housing forums, attended by a total of 180 Curtin constituents. The first housing forum, in October 2023, was about listening to a fairly representative mix of renters, homeowners and mortgage holders from across the Curtin community. Together we identified the top three issues and top three goals for housing in Curtin. I then called on the community to submit their policy ideas towards these goals. We had a huge range of suggestions from simple ideas that have been around for years to detailed and nuanced policy proposals. Our second Curtin housing forum in November 2023 involved a panel of experts evaluating these community policy ideas and assessing other proposed policy suggestions as well.</para>
<para>Through this process, the Curtin community identified our top three housing issues as a lack of affordable housing to rent and buy, a lack of diverse housing options and a tax system with the wrong incentives. Our top three long-term goals for housing were identified as secure long-term housing available for all, policies to incentivise appropriate homes and integration of social and affordable housing into our communities. So my community has identified supply as the main issue and, in particular, noted the need for more housing options for social affordable housing.</para>
<para>Is this bill the right action? It's broadly accepted that the current housing problem is a supply problem and needs to be addressed with supply levers. This Help to Buy scheme is not about supply. It's about demand. It's about helping eligible low- to middle-income owners to purchase new or existing homes with as little as a two per cent deposit by accessing equity from the government. Housing Australia will contribute to part of the purchase price of a house or apartment, and the Commonwealth will become a part owner of the property. Help to Buy would be open to 10,000 Australian applicants each financial year and would be administered by the states, which would receive an allocation according to population. For WA, I would imagine this means approximately a thousand shared equity loans per year. The Help to Buy program will run alongside the home guarantee scheme and is intended to support Australians who would otherwise not be able to purchase a home.</para>
<para>So is it a good scheme? Are shared equity home loans a good approach? Let's be clear. It doesn't create more homes. But it does make a particular target group of potential buyers more competitive in the fight for the limited homes available. I believe there is a place for shared equity schemes as long as we're very clear that they're addressing equity, not a housing shortage. They reshuffle the priority of different people in the line, rather than reducing the number in the line or increasing the houses available.</para>
<para>I'm fortunate in my previous career to have worked on an innovation project with the excellent team at WA's Keystart. Keystart is one of three state organisations, along with New South Wales and Victoria, that currently administer shared equity home loans. Keystart is an established part of WA social and affordable housing scene. It was established in 1989 and administers shared equity home loans on behalf of the WA Housing Authority as well as provides low deposit home loans, access home loans, Aboriginal home loans and rural home loans. I understand that the Help to Buy scheme was in part modelled on Keystart's shared-equity scheme, with some updates made in response to their lessons learnt. My conclusion, from discussions and interactions with Keystart, is that shared-equity schemes are an important part of a national housing assistance package, but I understand that a number of concerns have been raised about these types of schemes. There seem to be four main issues. Firstly, shared-equity schemes may contribute to further growth in house prices if they're of sufficient scale. Secondly, they're expensive and so have limited scalability. Thirdly, they may encourage those for whom homeownership may not be the most suitable option to take on undue financial risk. Lastly, they may divert resources from supporting people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness. I want to consider how these concerns might apply to Help to Buy.</para>
<para>First is increased house prices. The Productivity Commission has said that, unless it's well targeted, assistance to prospective homebuyers presents too great a risk of increasing housing demand and, consequently, house prices. We've seen this with previous homebuyer schemes, like first home owner grants. Last year about 62,000 houses were sold in WA, and the median Perth house sale price was $590,000. If, as assumed, WA would receive an allocation of a thousand shared-equity opportunities per year, that would only constitute about six per cent of WA house sales. It seems unlikely that increasing the buying power of a thousand potential buyers would have a material impact on house prices, but it's worth noting that this is not a zero impact. It will provide some upward pressure, but the scheme will make a significant difference to the life of targeted recipients. While the exact thresholds are not being set in legislation, we expect it to be targeted to people with an income of $90,000—or a couple with $120,000—buying a home that costs less than $600,000, which is close to the median Perth house price. While I'm genuinely concerned about the inflationary impacts of injecting more grants into the economy, if this is well targeted it should be unlikely to cause material inflation.</para>
<para>The second concern is about cost. Because shared-equity schemes are capital intensive, they're not scalable. Obviously, you can't complain about both these things at the same time. A scheme will either be inflationary, if it involves a significant number of buyers, or too small and not scalable. But this is an expensive way to weight the scales in the race for limited available homes. The thousand lucky Western Australian recipients will benefit, but there are lots of people affected by the current housing shortage who will not benefit, and the capital tied up in the program—nearly $2 billion—is significant. The Commonwealth government will continue to own part of these people's homes until they sell or refinance. Keystart's experience shows that about half of the shared-equity borrowers buy out the government share within nine years, meaning that half don't, so this is a long-term commitment from the government.</para>
<para>Thirdly, some commentators have suggested a shared-equity scheme might encourage people to take on undue risk. Obviously we haven't yet seen all the details of how the Help to Buy program will start, but state equivalent schemes like Keystart show that about half of the borrowers buy out the government by the nine-year mark. They might sell the home or refinance. It seems that in a time of increasing property prices this is fairly low risk, but if prices were to fall it's quite possible that the government could be seen to be responsible for committing people to a negative equity situation. But there's always this risk in investing, and that risk is being borne by the government as well as the borrower. One advantage of a shared-equity scheme over a low-deposit scheme is that it addresses the deposit and serviceability barriers, while a low-deposit scheme only addresses the deposit barrier. It also worth noting that shared ownership disproportionately helps women own their own homes, with 66 per cent of Keystart shared-equity participants being women. This is important given that older women are one of the fastest-growing groups represented in the national homelessness population, with a rise of more than 30 per cent in the last five years. Research based on the most recent census has found that close to a quarter of a million Australian women aged 55 and older are at risk of homelessness.</para>
<para>Finally, concern has been raised that investments in shared-equity schemes will divert resources from homelessness services. As I said at the outset, this Help to Buy scheme is not a silver bullet or a solution to the housing crisis; it's part of a web of what needs to be a comprehensive and well-resourced national housing plan. Resources should absolutely continue to be allocated to housing and homelessness services. The government's currently consulting on a national housing plan—the first plan since 1946—but the issues paper for the consultation focuses solely on a social security perspective. It doesn't refer to any tax reform. I urge the government to be bold and brave and include an economic perspective, not just a welfare perspective, in the national housing plan.</para>
<para>On balance, I'll be supporting this bill. It will give relief to a small number of targeted low- to middle-income homebuyers. It will not, however, solve Australia's housing crisis. It's a small puzzle piece in a much larger problem which needs longer term systemic reform.</para>
<para>I want to speak a bit about the need for review and oversight. I note the bill has a three-year review clause. This is an important inclusion in order to understand the impact the scheme has on the housing market and the economy. I'm also concerned about the amount of ministerial discretion in this bill. The eligibility thresholds are not being set in legislation, and it's a large amount of money—nearly $2 billion—to allocate within this broad discretion. I would prefer to see these eligibility criteria overseen by parliament, while I also recognise that flexibility may be needed to adjust how it is working. So I would support that threshold being made a disallowable instrument so it does have that parliamentary oversight.</para>
<para>I would also urge the government to ensure that the panel of lenders are carefully chosen and care's taken to ensure that they have requisite skills and capacity to deliver this scheme well. Evidence shows that the highest risk time for falling into arrears is between three and five years after taking on a loan. This is often triggered by life changes—a break-up, loss of job or illness. Lenders need to be equipped to respond to this risk of financial hardship with support structures to identify those most at risk of defaulting on their share of the loan, to communicate clearly how shared equity works and to help borrowers take timely action if they find themselves in financial hardship. It's essential that the panel of lenders have well-understood standards for delivering these shared-equity loans and clearly articulated roles for a potentially more vulnerable cohort.</para>
<para>While this bill will not create more homes or fix the housing crisis, I commend it to the House and look forward to seeing at least 1,000 Western Australian recipients helped to realise their goal of homeownership.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PERRETT</name>
    <name.id>HVP</name.id>
    <electorate>Moreton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise in support of the motion moved by the Hon. Minister for Housing and member for Franklin. The Help to Buy policy was a key election commitment that we took to the Australian people in 2022, and the Help to Buy Bill 2023 is honouring that commitment. This will support up to 40,000 Australians purchase a home of their own. Despite the coalition's attempts to discredit this policy during the election, the Help to Buy scheme is a solid, no-nonsense policy squarely aimed at giving those on low and middle incomes the opportunity to purchase a home by helping participants overcome the hurdles of saving for a deposit and servicing a mortgage.</para>
<para>The scheme is one element of the government's commitment to improving housing affordability, including—I remind you—the $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund, the $3 billion Social Housing Accelerator payment and the largest increase to Commonwealth rent assistance in 30 years. Who would have thought that a prime minister that grew up in social housing would be so focused on making sure that Australians have a roof over their head? Affordable housing is critical to the economic wellbeing of all Australians, and that's why the Albanese government is taking action.</para>
<para>Despite a 'no-alition' attempt to cast doubt and discredit this scheme, the Albanese government has been working carefully on the design with states, territories and lenders. It's a shame that, when the member for Deakin was offered a meeting to discuss the issues that he's raised in parliament, the shadow minister for housing did not respond. If the member for Deakin had attended that meeting, he would have found that our scheme is very much like the Home Guarantee Scheme, which the former Liberal and National government designed. Its criteria are set out in delegated legislation. The shadow minister for housing would also have discovered, if he'd accepted the opportunity to meet, that our scheme is nothing like the HomeBuilder scheme, which blew the housing market and was criticised by state, territories and many others.</para>
<para>We made it very clear in our election campaign what the key criteria would be for Help to Buy. In fact, my campaign had fact sheets setting out very clearly what the criteria would be. What Australians need at this time is a government that's going to act on what it says in terms of putting a roof over Australians, and I'm glad that we are committed to doing that. I'll have a more to say on this down the track.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43 and may be resumed at a later hour. Given the interruption of the member for Moreton's speech he'll be granted leave to continue when the debate is resumed.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</title>
        <page.no>56</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Queensland: Roads, Biosecurity Protection Levy</title>
          <page.no>56</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOYCE</name>
    <name.id>299498</name.id>
    <electorate>Flynn</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>What is Labor's beef with Central Queensland? Senate estimates this month revealed that $400 million of funding for the upgrades of 475 kilometres of beef corridors to be sealed has been pushed back from a start date in the 2025-26 financial year until the 2027-28 financial year. Once again we see the Labor government biting the hand that feeds it.</para>
<para>Labor is set to introduce a new tax to parliament which will force farmers to pay the biosecurity costs of international importers, pushing up prices for Australian-grown produce at supermarkets for all consumers. This new tax rate will be set as a proportion of the industry's average cost value production over a three-year period rather than the base rate of 10 per cent on industry-led levies, due to confusion in the levy system and inequity. Yet, at the same time the Labor government has betrayed Central Queensland by delaying the beef corridor upgrade—an upgrade that will not only improve road safety for all users but form a strategic web of agricultural supply chains from east to west.</para>
<para>I urge the Labor government to get on and build the beef corridors as soon as possible to address this critical infrastructure need for our rural communities. Sealing of these roads not only improves the industry's ability but improves the overall quality of life of all rural Queenslanders.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bean Electorate: Communities at Work Galilee School</title>
          <page.no>56</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DAVID SMITH</name>
    <name.id>276714</name.id>
    <electorate>Bean</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>2024 has started strongly for the Communities at Work Galilee School in my electorate of Bean. This small but growing school hit a milestone of achieving 100 enrolments. The timing could not be better, with the school celebrating its 25th year this year.</para>
<para>The Galilee School fills a niche by supporting teenagers who struggle in mainstream school environments. It's a place where young adults and their families can find a path to success. Here's what one of Galilee School's recent year 10 students said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Our time here at Galilee School has been more than just classes and lunches; it's been a collective experience of growth, friendship, and shared laughter. We've discovered the importance of teamwork, resilience, and the undeniable truth that laughter is indeed the best medicine.'</para></quote>
<para>For many of their students, Galilee School has been life changing. It has meant the difference between dropping out and finishing school. The success of the school owes so much to the untiring work of its school principal, Tim McNevin, his leadership team and the fantastic team of teachers, youth workers, learning support and other support staff over the 25-year history of the school. I look forward to celebrating their contribution to the Galilee School in their milestone year and look forward to the next 25 years with Galilee as well.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Energy</title>
          <page.no>56</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BROADBENT</name>
    <name.id>MT4</name.id>
    <electorate>Monash</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In the <inline font-style="italic">Australian</inline> today, Nick Cater wrote:</para>
<quote><para class="block">In 2004, Australian electricity bills were the fourth-lowest in the OECD. The wind and solar caper had barely begun, and coal and gas supplied 91 per cent of the National Electricity Market. Today, after 20 years of subsidy chasing by the renewable energy industry, Australia has slipped to 10th place in the OECD rankings of end-user power prices.</para></quote>
<para>In 20 years, Australia is dropping on a yearly basis by comparison with the rest of the world regarding the prices we charge our communities for their power. Who pays that price? I'll tell you who pays the price. It's the pensioners, people on disability support, single-parent households and low-income households that have paid the price for what's happened here over the last 20 years. On top of that, we have funnelled millions and millions of dollars into renewable energy projects over those 20 years.</para>
<para>I remember saying to a chief executive officer of a power company, 'How many wind towers would there be in Australia without a subsidy?' He went, 'Nil, none, not one.' We need to take good care of the people who are least able to pay, especially in the regions. Australia needs to turn around its approach to what we're doing on renewables.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Werriwa Electorate: Infrastructure</title>
          <page.no>56</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STANLEY</name>
    <name.id>265990</name.id>
    <electorate>Werriwa</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The suburb of Edmondson Park in Werriwa has grown significantly over the last few decades. In 2011 the population was 424. By 2021 it had soared to over 12,000, and it continues to grow, as one of the fastest growing suburbs in Werriwa. Residents deserve the infrastructure to support this growth.</para>
<para>Last Friday, I was proud to accompany the member for Macquarie Fields, Anoulack Chanthivong, as he opened a new commuter car park at Edmondson Park station, providing an additional 900 new parking spaces. Residents will now have access to around 2,000 commuter car spaces at Edmondson Park. The build used cutting-edge technology with a focus on reducing carbon emissions, with carbon capture cement in the footpaths, portable battery storage systems instead of diesel generators, AI-powered energy monitoring systems, hydrogen generators and recycling of 94 per cent of the construction and demolition waste. The car park has 800 rooftop solar panels to help power the building, and it houses 10 electric vehicle charging stations, with capacity to add more as required. This vital piece of infrastructure will encourage more residents to take public transport, which will ease congestion on our roads. Thank you to all the community members who helped advocate for the facility.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Grocery Prices</title>
          <page.no>57</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BANDT</name>
    <name.id>M3C</name.id>
    <electorate>Melbourne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>When Woolworths announced that their CEO, Brad Banducci, was heading to the self-check-out line, you might have missed the bigger story: the half-yearly profits. They came in at just under $1 billion. That's a 2.2 per cent increase from the same time the year before. What an absolute rort! Corporations in this country not only know how to take advantage of their customers; they also know how to take advantage of a media circus to bury the lead. CEOs come and go, but if we don't rein in these profiteering corporations then the pain that people are feeling will only get worse.</para>
<para>We've been told that people haven't eaten vegetables in two months. We've been told that people are skipping meals. We've been told that parents are surviving off the leftovers from the meals they can manage to scrape together for their kids. We've been told time and time again that the supermarkets and their record profits are to blame. What was the Prime Minister's response when asked if he will break up the supermarket duopoly so that everyone can afford to put food on the table? He said, 'We're not a command-and-control economy. We're not the old Soviet Union.'</para>
<para>I've got news for the Prime Minister: we do have a command-and-control economy, but it's corporations like Woolworths and Coles that are calling the shots, and Labor is taking their direction. Unless Labor has the guts to take them on, it's struggling families and everyday people that will continue to pay the price. No-one in this country should have to make the choice between paying the rent and paying for groceries—no-one.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Macquarie Electorate: Small Business</title>
          <page.no>57</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEMPLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>181810</name.id>
    <electorate>Macquarie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I discovered a new Macquarie small business at the Springwood Growers Market this weekend, the Blue Mountains Liquor Company, whose sugar-free liqueur is made with oranges from the Hawkesbury. They were alongside many entrepreneurs who were giving a great idea a go, exactly what I did around 30 years ago.</para>
<para>The Albanese government wants to provide practical help for small businesses. Every sole trader will get a tax cut from July, every director of a small business will get a tax cut from July and every worker in every small business will get a tax cut from July. We're also helping businesses save on energy, with the second round of grants for small-business energy upgrades opening this week in New South Wales, and there's a 20 per cent bonus tax deduction available on spending for more efficient energy use. Blue Mountains local Martin Rogers is delivering our free Digital Solutions program to small businesses, with support on digital commerce, security and marketing, and there's also our Cyber Wardens educational program, designed to build a cybersmart small-business workforce, so owners know that the whole team is more cyberalert. These are practical things that will make a difference.</para>
<para>Small businesses are not just the engine room of my local economy. They're also my friends and my neighbours, they're the sponsors of our schools and sporting clubs, and they're one of the reasons we love living where we do, which is why I'll always shop local first.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Mayo Electorate: Sport</title>
          <page.no>57</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SHARKIE</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
    <electorate>Mayo</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'd like to talk about a couple of recent outings down in the Southern Vales region of my electorate. The first was to the Aldinga Sharks soccer club. Now, 2023 was a landmark year for the club, in which it completed a comprehensive upgrade of its facilities. I was really pleased to assist the club in landing a $2.2 million federal funding grant to establish the soccer facilities at Aldinga, a very busy and fast-growing part of my electorate. We recently had the season launch, and I was there to hand out bags to all the junior players. It was such a great day. It was wonderful to see such a family affair. I wish all these players all the best for the 2024 season, which kicks off in just a couple of weeks.</para>
<para>I'd also like to talk about the McLaren Flat Primary School. I recently visited the school to present their flags, and it's a credit to the teaching staff that the students were so knowledgeable about their flags. I was also there to be part of the announcement of their leadership roles. They have five portfolios: sport, environment, wellbeing, performing arts, and social inclusion and community. It gives me such great comfort to know that we have young people who are dedicated and willing to step up and take on leadership roles, and I have no doubt that they will be an absolute asset to the school this year as they serve in those roles, and to our wider community.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Dominguez, Mr Geoffrey</title>
          <page.no>58</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr REID</name>
    <name.id>300126</name.id>
    <electorate>Robertson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to acknowledge Mr Geoffrey Dominguez, who has been awarded a 10-year long-service medal for his contributions to the Duke of Edinburgh's International Award for his service in training young surf lifesavers at MacMasters Beach Surf Lifesaving Club. Mr Dominguez received his medal and was recognised at a special awards ceremony at Government House in Sydney with His Royal Highness the Duke of Edinburgh, Prince Edward.</para>
<para>The Duke of Ed award, known for its emphasis on personal development, community service and outdoor exploration, aligns seamlessly with delivering non-formal education and learning outcomes for young people. The Duke of Ed award believes that when young people are provided with the right support and opportunities they can achieve amazing outcomes for themselves and for their community. Mr Dominguez has been proudly involved with the Duke of Ed Award, imparting knowledge and guiding young Australians on the Central Coast to reach their full potential.</para>
<para>Across Australia, surf lifesavers play a crucial role at our patrolled beaches, monitoring the conditions of the water and responding to emergency situations. It take a very selfless person to be a surf lifesaver. They sacrifice a great amount of time and they sacrifice for our community's safety. In Australia, there are over 190,000 surf lifesavers who help patrol the country's 52,000 kilometres of coastline.</para>
<para>To Mr Dominguez: congratulations on your 10-year service medal and thank you for all your work for our Central Coast family.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Beaudesert State High School</title>
          <page.no>58</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUCHHOLZ</name>
    <name.id>230531</name.id>
    <electorate>Wright</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today I'd like to acknowledge and congratulate all the students at Beaudesert State High School on their recent leadership ceremony. Last week I had the pleasure of attending the ceremony. The true respect, talent and regard of the school's students was on full display. I want to congratulate Phoenix Brooks and Jack Smith on their appointments as school captains, and Mia Matthews and Daniel Murtagh on their appointments as Indigenous leaders. I also want to congratulate all of the students who were appointed school vice-captains, house sporting captains, and arts and extra curriculum captains.</para>
<para>I want to pay tribute to the dedicated, hardworking staff at the school: Damien Burke, who has recently been appointed as the acting principal, a role in which I am confident he will make positive, impactful changes in the school; the deputy principals, Sheryl Healy, Damian O'Brien, Rob Wonson, Kirsty Carey and Todd Winton; as well as the heads of departments and student welfare staff and all of the teachers at the high school. Without all of you, the school would simply not run and the students wouldn't get the vital education and the influence they all deserve.</para>
<para>Congratulations to all the students at Beaudesert State High School. I have no doubt that you'll be a success in the future, whatever you set your minds to. All those students can achieve whatever they want from Beaudesert State High School.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Energy</title>
          <page.no>58</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MILLER-FROST</name>
    <name.id>296272</name.id>
    <electorate>Boothby</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'd like to bring to the attention of the House and any businesses in Boothby listening at home that round 2 of the energy efficiency grants for small and medium businesses are now open to help businesses reduce their electricity costs.</para>
<para>When I talk to small businesses in my electorate of Boothby, they tell me that a big part of their operating costs is power bills. Having run businesses myself, I know that every dollar counts and can make a difference to the sustainability and profitability of the business. Modest investments in new equipment can make for really significant ongoing savings, and that's what these grants are about.</para>
<para>The grants are for up to $25,000 and can be used to upgrade, for instance, equipment like an air conditioner or a chiller—anything that will help the business with their energy efficiency. These small-equipment upgrades can make a long-term, really substantial saving to the cost of energy bills and of course reduce emissions at the same time. Round 1 was very popular, so I would encourage any businesses that are interested to get their skates on straight away and get an application in. Please contact my office for any details on how to apply. But I can't stress enough that we expect these grants to be very, very popular. So I encourage businesses to gets their applications in quickly.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Vocational Education and Training</title>
          <page.no>59</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CALDWELL</name>
    <name.id>306489</name.id>
    <electorate>Fadden</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today following a visit by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition—who is of course the shadow minister for industry, skills and training—to my electorate of Fadden last week. We met with the CEO of Major Training Group, Matthew Tenkate, who's at the helm of a second-generation family business that's been in operation for more than 25 years. It's businesses like Major Training Group that are driving the local economy in the Gold Coast, where we are heavily reliant on building and construction as important pillars of the economy. Despite the government's failing in this sector, I commend Matthew and his team for the important work to upskill Gold Coasters in our most important trades.</para>
<para>In fact, these types of businesses are thriving in spite of what they are facing under this Labor government. Despite the Prime Minister peddling his fee-free TAFE myth, the minister for skills recently admitted that he is presiding over the worst skills shortage in 50 years. New data from the National Centre for Vocational Education Research has shown a 9.16 per cent decrease in apprenticeship uptake within my electorate since the Albanese government came into power. And, as a Deputy Leader of the Opposition rightly pointed out, the data is clear: despite all of Labor's promises to skill Australians, their policies are failing, and there are now more than 50,000 fewer apprentices and trainees today than when Labor took office. This government's poorly designed and implemented programs are hindering, more so than helping, Australians looking to upskill.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cost of Living</title>
          <page.no>59</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr MULINO</name>
    <name.id>132880</name.id>
    <electorate>Fraser</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm proud to be a member of a government, the Albanese government, that is prioritising measures to deal with inflation and cost-of-living pressures—a challenge that arose from international supply chain blockages and the illegal invasion of Ukraine. That's why we're delivering $23 billion in targeted relief while not adding to inflation. We've implemented a targeted approach so that assistance goes to those who need it most, and it's structured so as not to add to inflation—something that the RBA has confirmed on a number of occasions.</para>
<para>Our cost-of-living package includes a number of measures, including wages rising at the fastest rate in a decade, increases in the minimum wage and a significant increase in pay for aged-care workers. This was confirmed in data last week which showed real wage increases over the last year. It also includes electricity bill relief, cheaper child care, expanding parental leave, making medicines cheaper, building more social and affordable housing and, of course, fee-free TAFE. But what's really important is that those opposite have voted against every single one of those cost-of-living measures, whether it be cheaper energy, the HAFF or it be absolutely any measure to help people get higher wages. Then they come in here and complain about energy prices and wage levels.</para>
<para>We are also implementing measures for the long run, including investing in skills, domestic supply chains and infrastructure. The Australian people want solutions, not knee-jerk opposition. And solutions are exactly what this government is providing.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>New Vehicle Efficiency Standard</title>
          <page.no>59</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr COULTON</name>
    <name.id>HWN</name.id>
    <electorate>Parkes</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last week I spent time in my electorate, travelling through the north and western part and visiting communities in Dubbo, Narromine, Bourke, Brewarrina and Walgett. I did a bit of a poll in the main streets of those towns as to the vehicles that were parked there. There were a large number of four-wheel drives: Prados, LandCruisers, Ford Territories and a lot of utes with toolboxes on the back and ladders on the top—and a couple of dogs on some of them. And those people would be horrified to know that the policy from this government will see a massive increase in the cost of those vehicles. These people haven't got vehicles to plan their next glamping trip to the Daintree. These are the average people who might travel 50 kilometres into town to work every day. If you have a look in the backseat, there'll be a couple of car seats and room to put supplies the back.</para>
<para>I understand the Treasurer is here—and the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. These SUVs might be a bit inconvenient when you go to park a Tesla next to them at Westfield, but these are the workhorses that rural hardworking people need, and this government is picking on them. They're expecting hardworking regional Australians to subsidise those in the inner cities buying their elective vehicles. I'm not opposed to electric vehicles. They've got their place, but it's not in the bush.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cost of Living</title>
          <page.no>59</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr GARLAND</name>
    <name.id>295588</name.id>
    <electorate>Chisholm</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm so pleased to be part of a government that is taking real action to relieve cost-of-living pressures. I note that our terrific Treasurer is in the chamber right now, and he absolutely knows that a lot of Australians are under the pump at the moment. And that's why we're doing a number of things to make life easier for Australians right around the country. We've commissioned an ACCC review of supermarket pricing, and this review will examine the competitiveness of retail prices for everyday groceries, as well as look closer at the difference between farm gate and supermarket prices. That is in addition to the $23 billion of targeted relief. That's targeted relief relieving electricity bill costs, making medicines cheaper—and note that that includes patients accessing almost 25,000 60-day scripts in my own electorate of Chisholm. We're making it easier and cheaper for people to see a doctor. We're making early childhood education cheaper and expanding parental leave. We're building more social and affordable homes and increasing rent assistance. We're delivering fee-free TAFE. And we know that wages are rising at the fastest rate in a decade, including for minimum wage and aged care workers. Of course, this is all before we consider our recently announced tax plan which will benefit every single taxpayer in the country. I'm so proud to be part of a government who takes our responsibility seriously.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Leichhardt Electorate: Project Recognise</title>
          <page.no>60</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ENTSCH</name>
    <name.id>7K6</name.id>
    <electorate>Leichhardt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In the wake of Cyclone Jasper and associated floods, the true spirit of the Far North Queensland community has shone brightly. In conjunction with Sergeant Dave Raymond, Project Recognise has been created to honour and pay tribute to the many unsung heroes and volunteers for many acts of selflessness and generosity that have supported our affected communities in these challenging times. It has been remarkable to see the volume of nominations coming through. The community wanted an avenue to say thank you back to so many who have stepped up. These actions, large and small, have not gone unnoticed. To the 550 and counting individuals and organisations that have been recognised to date, I want to say thank you on behalf of the electorate of Leichhardt. Through nomination by their peers, recipients receive an official certificate and a letter thanking them for their efforts, acknowledging their important contribution towards the recovery. It is one small way that we can give thanks and recognise their efforts.</para>
<para>At the end of the day, through all the trials and the tribulations, Far North Queenslanders are an incredibly tough and loving bunch, and the fact has never been more clear to me because of the amazing efforts that we've seen across the whole spectrum of generosity that started, basically, on the evening of the disaster and continues to this very day. It's amazing how people step up when in need.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Dunkley By-Election</title>
          <page.no>60</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:53</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms THWAITES</name>
    <name.id>282212</name.id>
    <electorate>Jagajaga</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I was so proud to be in Carrum Downs last weekend, backing Labor's fantastic candidate for Dunkley, Jodie Belyea. Jodie is a mum with a mortgage, and she's a local who has already had some great wins fighting for her community. She will be an absolute champion for her community in this place.</para>
<para>While doorknocking in Dunkley, I heard how families are under the pump with rising costs at the supermarket and with household bills. People in Carrum Downs told me they welcome Labor's tax cuts—working mums and dads who are feeling cost-of-living pressures and who will directly benefit from our tax cuts—because our tax cuts will put money back into the pockets of every taxpayer in Dunkley and every taxpayer in Australia, alongside savings our government is already providing with our cheaper child care, cheaper medicines, making it easier to see a bulk billing GP, and, of course, the establishment of our Medicare Urgent Care Clinics, including one in Frankston.</para>
<para>Our government is focused on helping people grappling with cost-of-living pressures. And of course we know there's more to be done, and I know our tremendous Treasurer is focused on this. But in contrast, those opposite have voted time and time again against measures to reduce cost-of-living pressures. Peter Dutton wants the people in Dunkley to work longer for less. That's why we need Jodie in here as part of a Labor government to fight for the people of Dunkley and provide them with real cost-of-living relief.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>New Vehicle Efficiency Standard</title>
          <page.no>60</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHESTER</name>
    <name.id>IPZ</name.id>
    <electorate>Gippsland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Albanese government promised openness and transparency. Instead, we have a secret plan to increase the price of Australia's favourite cars by up to $20,000. Those opposite, including the Prime Minister and Treasurer, laughed. But neither the Prime Minister nor the Treasurer have been willing to release the economic modelling around the national vehicle efficiency standards, and that is a flashing red light to all Australian families. The government is hiding the truth about how much prices will increase for their favourite cars. There is a lot at stake here for regional and suburban Australians, with the minister for climate change is set to impose this massive new tax on our favourite vehicles. The member for McMahon is famous for one particular quote. In the lead-up to the 2019 election he was bold, and he was upfront. This is what he said to Australians: 'If you don't like our policies, don't vote for us.'</para>
<para>Let me assure those opposite who are new to this place: you have every chance of being a one-term member of parliament if you back this minister's plan to increase the cost of SUVs, people movers and other vehicles. Families that are struggling with the cost of living don't like this policy because it's going to hit them with a tax on their favourite vehicles, and they simply won't vote for it. The minister is refusing to release the economic modelling, and denying there will be price increases in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis. I urge those opposite: if you don't like his policies, don't vote for them.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Grocery Prices</title>
          <page.no>61</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RAE</name>
    <name.id>300122</name.id>
    <electorate>Hawke</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We know that families are facing higher prices at the supermarket checkout with nothing more to show for it in their trollies. It's hurting household budgets, and more people are going without. After the supermarket expose on <inline font-style="italic">Four Corners</inline> last week, and the recently released Fels inquiry, it is clear that supermarket practices are only exacerbating this pain for Australian consumers. Misleading pricing practices and a lack of competition are hurting the people in my community who are already struggling with the cost of living. That's why the Albanese Labor government is launching an ACCC review of the big supermarkets—including Coles and Woolworths—as well as an independent review of the food and grocery code, led by Dr Craig Emerson.</para>
<para>After a decade of inaction and neglect of competition policy and regulation under the Liberals, the Albanese Labor government is committed to ensuring that Australian consumers and suppliers can benefit from a more competitive and robust marketplace. While our big supermarkets are posting record profits, consumers and suppliers alike are battling with rising costs. These reviews are essential to ensure that our supermarkets give Australians a fair deal at the checkout. Whether it's prices at the supermarket, child care, the doctor and pharmacy, or, indeed, paying the taxman, the Albanese Labor government has a plan to ease costs and put more money back into household budgets and workers' pockets.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2023</title>
          <page.no>61</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr COLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>241067</name.id>
    <electorate>Banks</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In June last year the Albanese government released its shocking Communication Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2023, which was so bad that it managed to align just about every interest group in Australia against it. We know that already. But what we only know through a recent freedom of information document is the personal involvement of the Prime Minister in approving the single worst feature of this bill. Three weeks before the bill was presented, the Minister for Communications wrote a letter to the Prime Minister seeking a bit of cover, saying: 'I want to have the personal power to order investigations about allegations of misinformation into, basically, anyone. I want to specify the terms of reference, any other particulars and the time frame. I want to be able to respond to requests for information from the media or members of the public to order any misinformation investigation I want, personally.' Imagine if the minister had that power during the Voice referendum, when the government often claimed that things it didn't agree with were misinformation. Does our Prime Minister say, 'It's a terrible idea, in one of the world's great democracies, to give an elected politician the power to personally investigate allegations of misinformation'? No, he doesn't say that. He actually, a couple of weeks ago, through his designated assistant minister, wrote back to the minister and said: 'Great idea. Go for it. Order whatever investigations into misinformation and allegations of misinformation you want.' It's a shocking indictment on the Prime Minister and a terrible piece of legislation.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Member for Lalor, you have one minute to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cost of Living</title>
          <page.no>61</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RYAN</name>
    <name.id>249224</name.id>
    <electorate>Lalor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The people of Lalor, like the people of Dunkley, are doing it tough. We all know that in this place. People around the country are facing cost-of-living issues. I'm really proud to be a member of an Albanese Labor government that is addressing these issues step by step: cheaper medicines, cheaper child care, tripling the bulk-billing incentive. Wherever we can see a way to help we are doing it. We're also providing tax cuts to every taxpayer in Australia. This is critical in an electorate like mine, where families really need that kind of support. While those opposite smear, scare and cut, we on this side are getting on with the business of delivering solutions for this country. I am really proud that the people of Lalor can rely on me, like the people of Dunkley relied on Peta Murphy to deliver for people doing it tough in this country.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>MINISTRY</title>
        <page.no>61</page.no>
        <type>MINISTRY</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Temporary Arrangements</title>
          <page.no>61</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I inform the House that the Minister for Communications will be absent from question time this week. The Attorney-General will answer questions on her behalf.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>CONDOLENCES</title>
        <page.no>61</page.no>
        <type>CONDOLENCES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Mr Cross, Manfred Douglas, AM</title>
          <page.no>61</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I inform the House of the death on 30 January 2024 of Manfred Douglas Cross AM, a member of this House for the division of Brisbane from 1961 to 1975 and 1980 to 1990. As a mark of respect to the memory of Manfred Cross, I invite all present to rise in their places.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</title>
        <page.no>62</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Immigration</title>
          <page.no>62</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SUKKAR</name>
    <name.id>242515</name.id>
    <electorate>Deakin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs. Over 500,000 visas have been granted under the Albanese Labor government in the past year, with more than 1.6 million projected to be granted over the next five years. Does the minister agree that this is putting immense pressure on housing, transport and basic services on top of the cost-of-living crisis already being faced by Australian families?</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I give the call to the Leader of the House on a point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Burke</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The introduction refers to the minister's portfolio, and then the question is about a series of other portfolios. It is not a question to the minister for immigration. It doesn't in any way ask about his actions in the question.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Fletcher</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question goes squarely to the actions and the responsibilities of the minister for immigration in granting visas. This is entirely within his portfolio, and it's an entirely appropriate question to be asked.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Burke</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question goes to consequences in other portfolios, not to the role of the minister—not in any way whatsoever.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Could the manager just resume his seat for a moment. I'm sure there's a way we can get past this, but the question is so broad that it is asking for an opinion. The question was regarding visas granted. Because of the nature of the question and the impact being so broad, the minister can answer the question, but it will be a very broad answer. It would be very unlikely anyone could take a point of order on relevance because of the way the question has been framed.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm going to allow the question. The member is entitled to ask the question, but moving forward I want to make sure that members simply can't be asked an opinion under the standing orders. That is going to be ruled out. Could the minister refer to his answer regarding the visas being granted. On the point of order?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Burke</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Herbert made an interjection that was a reflection on the speaker and should be withdrawn.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I would be disappointed if that were the case, but the member for Herbert will withdraw.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Thompson</name>
    <name.id>281826</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I withdraw.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GILES</name>
    <name.id>243609</name.id>
    <electorate>Scullin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Albanese government is getting on with fixing Australia's broken immigration system—a system broken by those opposite and no more so than when the Leader of the Opposition was the minister responsible. I'm proud to be working with my friend the Minister for Home Affairs to build a system that Australians can trust, helping us get the skills we need while bringing migration levels down to normal levels. We understand that competent and sensible administration of our visa system is something that is fundamentally important, ensuring that we remain an attractive destination whilst bringing migration levels down. We're doing that because of five actions the government has taken: closing COVID loopholes opened up by those opposite; strengthening integrity, unlike the former minister, who halved immigration compliance; ending settings that drive long-term temporary stays; tackling exploitation, which was another matter on which he sat on his hands; and targeting skilled migration so that we are addressing genuine shortages.</para>
<para>Martin Parkinson, the former Treasury secretary, described the 'absolutely and utterly broken migration system' as a reflection of 'almost a decade of wilful neglect', symbolised, as members opposite should recognise, by the one million visas in the in-tray when we came into government. Businesses couldn't get the workers they needed. Migrants and other workers were being exploited.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Dutton</name>
    <name.id>00AKI</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>On relevance, Speaker. You gave good direction before to the minister to say that he could broadly talk on the issues in relation to the question that he'd been asked, but only this minister could stray beyond your original—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Resume your seat. Please get to the point of order and do not add additional commentary. The point of order is on relevance.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Dutton</name>
    <name.id>00AKI</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The government has allowed 500,000 people in during a cost-of-living crisis—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Resume your seat. This is exactly the point I tried to raise before: with a broad question asking about opinions, the minister is going to be completely relevant because he was asked about such a broad range of topics. He is talking about his decisions as a minister and the actions he's taking. He couldn't be more relevant. The minister has the call.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GILES</name>
    <name.id>243609</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It seems that the Leader of the Opposition doesn't like being reminded of his record as a minister. Perhaps he should also remember what he said as Leader of the Opposition very recently. He said this: 'We do need an increase in the migration numbers.' He will say and do absolutely anything, this bloke. It isn't just about dividing Australians. We are focused on rebuilding the migration system that he broke.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Royal Australian Navy</title>
          <page.no>63</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LAWRENCE</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
    <electorate>Hasluck</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister. How will the Albanese Labor government's response to the surface fleet review shape the Royal Australian Navy for decades to come, and what alternatives are there?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MARLES</name>
    <name.id>HWQ</name.id>
    <electorate>Corio</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for her question and acknowledge her service. Last Tuesday the government announced its plan for the future Royal Australian Navy surface fleet, which will see an increase in the number of our surface combatants from 11 to 26, giving us the most capable Navy in the country's history. It will also see an acceleration of the acquisition of those service combatants such that the first will come into service this decade—in five years, not 10.</para>
<para>But the most important point is that this is a plan which is paid for, with an $11.1 billion increase in defence spending to fully fund the $54 billion it will take to make this happen. This is real. This is not make-believe. This is not the kind of announcement that we were used to from those opposite, such as the $35 billion guided weapons program where they only put $1 billion on the table. And this increase, combined with increases in last year's budget, will see defence spending go to 2.4 per cent of GDP by the early 2030s, and that compares to what we inherited from those opposite, which was taking defence spending to 2.1 per cent.</para>
<para>We have heard a lot from the Liberals over the last couple of months about defence spending. They and their little coven of supporters have been dancing around the fire, whipping each other into a frenzy. And, as they have been barking at the moon, we have—</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MARLES</name>
    <name.id>HWQ</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Here we go!</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! Members on my right will cease interjecting.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Morton is warned. I'm trying to hear from the Manager of Opposition Business, who is entitled to raise a point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Fletcher</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, on relevance: I invite you to consider whether the Deputy Prime Minister is entitled to be venturing into the territory that he's going in to now in response to what was, in fact, quite a tightly drafted question.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question contained 'what are the alternatives?' so the Deputy Prime Minister needs to ensure his answer contains the alternatives that he was asked about, not simply his opinions about former decisions. The Deputy Prime Minister has the call.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MARLES</name>
    <name.id>HWQ</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>We even heard the shadow minister suggest that, if there wasn't increased spending, there should be resignations. I always think one should be a little bit careful going to this space, lest one establishes a standard for themself that they cannot meet. When you strip away all the moon barking, what we are left with is the shadow Treasurer saying that defence spending should be within the envelope which they took to the last election—that is, 2.1 per cent by the early 2030s. When the shadow minister for defence has been asked whether he supports an increase in defence spending, he has consistently said he can't commit. All the while, the Leader of the Opposition has been completely silent on this issue. What that means is that the policy of those opposite is 2.1. And what that means is a cut in defence spending. The Albanese Labor government is committed to increasing defence spending to 2.4 per cent of GDP to give us the surface fleet we need to keep Australians safe.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Migration</title>
          <page.no>63</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LEY</name>
    <name.id>00AMN</name.id>
    <electorate>Farrer</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Housing. Over 500,000 visas have been granted by the Albanese Labor government in the past year, with more than 1.6 million projected to be granted over five years. Does the minister agree that Labor's policy of granting 500,000 visas in just one year has contributed to the average weekly cost to rent a unit in Frankston rising from $350 when Labor came to government to $420 today?</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>No. There is far too much noise. Order, members on my right! Order, the Minister for Home Affairs! It's not going to operate like that. Everyone knows the questions have to be heard in silence so that the minister can be heard in silence. It's a two-way street. Out of courtesy, the deputy leader will ask her question again, and there will be silence so I can hear the question—and hopefully everyone else can too.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LEY</name>
    <name.id>00AMN</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Housing. Over 500,000 visas have been granted by the Albanese Labor government in the past year, with more than 1.6 million projected to be granted over five years. Does the minister agree that Labor's policy of granting 500,000 visas in just one year has contributed to the average weekly cost to rent a unit in Frankston rising from $350 when Labor came to government to $420 today?</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Whoever is making noises like that is completely disrespectful. It will not happen. The minister for housing, homelessness and small business has the call.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COLLINS</name>
    <name.id>HWM</name.id>
    <electorate>Franklin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member opposite for her question. As she would know, if we'd kept the migration settings as they were when they left office, we'd have more migrants today than there are in this country, because of course the opposition left a mess, and we're busy cleaning it up, whether it is in migration or in housing.</para>
<para>What we're doing in housing is adding to supply. We have committed to over $25 billion in new housing investments over the next decade. We understand that the answer to the housing issues in Australia today is supply, supply, supply.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Barker is warned.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COLLINS</name>
    <name.id>HWM</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>They're very noisy over there. Of course, they were very noisy opposing the Housing Australia Future Fund that will actually build homes for Australians who need them.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Deakin is warned.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COLLINS</name>
    <name.id>HWM</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>We know they are going to oppose our Help to Buy scheme which would get more Australians into homeownership. They claim they support homeownership, but they're voting against more homes for Australians. They're voting against getting more Australians into homeownership. Indeed, we've heard a lot of criticism from them about us actually having a plan and an aspiration to build 1.2 million homes over the next five years. We are working with the states and territories. We have $3.5 billion on the table to incentivise the states and territories to make the reforms that are necessary to get homes on the ground for Australians that need them.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The minister will pause. The minister was asked about the cost of units and housing. She is answering why. She's being directly relevant. I will hear from the Deputy Leader of the Opposition.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Ley</name>
    <name.id>00AMN</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>With respect, Mr Speaker, my point of order is on relevance. I don't believe the minister is being directly relevant. My question was about the price of rents in Frankston—what it was then and what it is now. It was about the difference in cost in rents in Frankston from then to now. I think it was quite specific.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>On the point of order, I want to hear from the Leader of the House and then I want to talk about opinions, which ministers are being asked for.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Burke</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, I'm just raising as a point of order that, when you have just explained before someone takes a point of order that someone is clearly relevant, it seems that the point of order then becomes a simple contesting of the ruling you have just made rather than an actual point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Leader of the House makes a relevant point. The deputy leader is entitled to make a point of order on relevance, but a lot of leeway has been given so far. That leeway doesn't necessarily have to continue in that way. But, just so that everyone knows, we have had two questions now from the opposition regarding the opinions of ministers. That, as we saw with the first question, enables a very broad answer. If you ask for somebody's opinion, not a policy question and not necessarily about their responsibility, the minister is going to be very broad. So it is very difficult to make a point of order on relevance. I hope that's clear for everyone.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COLLINS</name>
    <name.id>HWM</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I doubt if the one minute left is going to be enough time for me to talk about all the things we're doing in housing. There's the $2 billion Social Housing Accelerator. The money is with the states. We are announcing homes right across Australia from that money already. There will be 4,000 new social homes over the next few years in partnership with the states and territories.</para>
<para>Just last week, I was in Perth with the Prime Minister, the WA Premier and the housing minister of Western Australia, where we announced another 219 apartments for Australians that need them. This is the sort of thing that we can fund through the Housing Infrastructure Facility. We have already unlocked $575 million and are putting another $1 billion into this facility. We have already supported 4,937 new homes since we came to office through Housing Australia, and we look forward to doing more. As I said, the announcement in Perth was just one of many that we have made and will continue to make because we are getting homes off the ground, whether they be in Western Australia or Victoria. Of course, 2,500 homes were announced last time I was in Victoria. We know we need to add to supply right across the country and we are getting on with the job of providing more homes for all Australians that need them.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation</title>
          <page.no>65</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms FERNANDO</name>
    <name.id>299964</name.id>
    <electorate>Holt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. How will the government's new tax cuts benefit Australian families and how will they help to build a better future?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I am pleased to get a question about the cost of living. You know it will be from this side of the House. I thank the member for Holt. We are giving a tax cut to some 13.6 million Australian taxpayers—every Australian taxpayer, not just some. The Leader of the Opposition and the opposition first said that they'd oppose it, then they said they'd roll it back, then they wanted an election on it. Then they rolled over and voted for it! But now it's before the Senate, and they're talking it out there, trying to delay a vote in the Senate. But the fact is that this is good policy, which is why they knew they had no choice, eventually. But they still continue to argue against it and still complain about it whilst they didn't vote against it. We know that, at the first opportunity, this is the sort of policy that they would roll back, because, in a moment of honesty, they said that was their position.</para>
<para>We want Australians to earn more, and last week we learnt that real wages in 2023 increased much earlier than what the Treasury estimates were. Our objective of people earning more and keeping more of what they earn is being met. Of course, we know those opposite want people to work longer, and they want people to work for less. These tax cuts will make a significant difference. A shop assistant on $32,000 will get a $414 tax cut. A nurse on $76,000 will get a tax cut of $1,579. A teacher on $80,000 will get $1,679. A police officer on $110,000 will benefit to the tune of $2,429. Our tax cuts are aimed directly at Middle Australia, because we know that is the right thing to do. Those opposite, of course, can change what they say, but they'll never change what they stand for. They can change how they vote, but they'll never change who they are, sneering and looking down on people, thinking that people earning under $45,000 a year are not worthy of a tax cut. They're not worrying about average workers; they're just worrying about themselves.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DISTINGUISHED VISITORS</title>
        <page.no>65</page.no>
        <type>DISTINGUISHED VISITORS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Meares, Ms Anna, OAM</title>
          <page.no>65</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'd like to acknowledge a few guests in the gallery. I'm pleased to inform the House that present in gallery today are the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic, Mr Jan Lipavsky, and the ambassador of the Czech Republic, Ms Jana Tyrer.</para>
<para>I'm also pleased to inform the House that present in the gallery today are the President of the Australian Olympic Committee, Ian Chesterman, and the Chef de Mission of the Australian Olympic Team 2024 and former Australian gold medallist cyclist, Ms Anna Meares OAM. A warm welcome to you all.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</title>
        <page.no>65</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Long COVID</title>
          <page.no>65</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr RYAN</name>
    <name.id>297660</name.id>
    <electorate>Kooyong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is for the health minister. The health committee's report into long COVID concluded that we need national indoor air quality standards to improve the safety of indoor spaces and reduce transmission of COVID-19 and other infectious diseases. The government's response last week acknowledged that it did not adopt that recommendation. Minister, I ask you: how do you propose we keep our kids safe at school during the next outbreak of a severe airborne virus?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUTLER</name>
    <name.id>HWK</name.id>
    <electorate>Hindmarsh</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Kooyong for her question, her deep interest before entering this place in public health, obviously, and her advocacy in the different debates that have happened in this building about how we respond to that once-in-a-century pandemic to ensure that we are better prepared next time. As the member has indicated, we have delivered our response to the report made by the health committee, led by the member for Macarthur, through the inquiry into long COVID. A number of recommendations were accepted. Others were noted by the government. I don't have the full response in front of me. There are, obviously, a number of different measures there, and I'll come to the question of clean air very quickly. There are a number of different measures there that are important considerations for Australians who are dealing with long COVID, as it's broadly termed, particularly the longer version of long COVID, if you like, which involves quite complex symptomology for a considerable period of time. We take the view that there are significant opportunities within our existing Medicare system for people to receive care from their general practitioner and from allied health professionals, as there are for other chronic diseases, and we want to see those rolled out along with better education for GPs and allied health professionals about that.</para>
<para>The member's specific question, though, is in relation to clean air. As we enter the back end of the emergency phase of the pandemic it did become clearer that this was an aerosol based coronavirus and that clean air was an important protection against infection. This is an area that involves significant regulation by states—particularly, for example, the regulation of air in schools and public hospital systems. Different actions are being taken by state governments, as the member would be aware. A lively debate or a lively discussion is continuing. I know in a couple of weeks there will be a workshop here in the parliament led by the Australian Academy of Science, the CSIRO and the Burnet Institute to continue the discussion about how we can provide better clean air.</para>
<para>I will say this to the member for Kooyong and others, the Labor Party took to the last election a commitment to deliver a centre for disease control so we can have one place where these debates can be better coordinated, particularly in a federal system where there's very much a split responsibility between the Commonwealth and state governments. I know the member for Kooyong will want to continue to be a part of that discussion.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Education</title>
          <page.no>66</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BYRNES</name>
    <name.id>299145</name.id>
    <electorate>Cunningham</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Education. What does the Universities Accord final report say about the future of higher education in Australia, and why is it important the government builds a better and fairer education system?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CLARE</name>
    <name.id>HWL</name.id>
    <electorate>Blaxland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank my friend, the sensational member for Cunningham, for her question. I also want to recognise in the public gallery the school teachers from Ukraine who are with us today. Welcome to Australia.</para>
<para>Under Bob Hawke and Paul Keating, the number of kids finishing high school jumped from 40 per cent to almost 80 per cent—that includes a lot of us here. That was nation-changing stuff.</para>
<para>On the weekend I released the Universities Accord final report, and that's a blueprint for how we reform higher education in this country for the next decade and the decade after that. What this report says is that by the middle of this century we'll need a workforce where 80 per cent of that workforce haven't just finished high school but have got a TAFE qualification or a university degree as well. That's not going to be easy. To do this, it says we've got to break down two big barriers. We've got to break down the artificial barrier between TAFE and university, and make it easier to move between the two and make sure the two systems are more integrated and seamless. We've also got to break down the invisible barrier that stops a lot of young people from the outer suburbs and from the regions from getting a crack at university in the first place and succeeding when they get there.</para>
<para>Today, almost one in two young people—young adults in their 20s and 30s—has a uni degree, but not everywhere, including not where I'm from. In places like Fairfield it's only 28 per cent, in Maranoa it's only 22 per cent and in Elizabeth in South Australia it's only 12 per cent. That, at its core, is what the Universities Accord report is all about. It's doing something to change that. This report is jam-packed full of reforms to tackle this and other challenges, including things like fee-free university places, fee-free university courses, needs based funding and making HECS simpler and fairer. I thank Professor Mary O'Kane AC and the Universities Accord team for their report.</para>
<para>The first stage of our response will come in the next few months. If we're going to succeed here we can't just rely on reforms at the university gate because the same kids who aren't getting a crack at university at the moment are the same kids who aren't finishing high school, who are falling behind in primary school and who aren't getting an opportunity to go to early education. It is all connected.</para>
<para>That's why we need to build a better and a fairer education system across the board, which helps ensure that no-one's held back and no-one is left behind. That's what we are going to need it we're going to build the skills and have the economic firepower to succeed in the decades ahead.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Migration</title>
          <page.no>66</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr WEBSTER</name>
    <name.id>281688</name.id>
    <electorate>Mallee</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the minister for immigration. Many Australians can't find a home to live in. Our roads are gridlocked, and essential services like schools and hospitals are under growing strain. Why is the Albanese Labor government making it worse by granting over 500,000 visas in just the past year, with more than 1.6 million visas projected to be granted over five years?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GILES</name>
    <name.id>243609</name.id>
    <electorate>Scullin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the honourable member for her question, and I say to her, and to all members, that we are getting on with the job of fixing a system that was fundamentally broken by those opposite. And we see that in all of the issues that the member raised. But what is concerning to me is that the member opposite and many members opposite on the one hand talk about the need for skilled migration in their reasons, and on the other hand they come into this place and tell a different story.</para>
<para>What we should be entitled to expect is a bit of consistency, and that might start not just with the Leader of the Opposition, who should reflect on his deplorable record, but also with the shadow minister, who, when he was in government, said: 'Well, we need to get our international students back. We need to get our working-holiday visa holders back and get these people back as soon as we can.' They should reflect on their record, and they should get behind our work in fixing the system that they broke.</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order!</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Barker is on a warning.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Deakin is also on a warning. So that means no more interjections from them, hopefully.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Defence</title>
          <page.no>67</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ZAPPIA</name>
    <name.id>HWB</name.id>
    <electorate>Makin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Defence Industry. How is the Albanese Labor government ensuring the Royal Australian Navy can play its part in Australia's defence, what impact will these decisions have on defence industry and how is the government changing previous approaches?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CONROY</name>
    <name.id>249127</name.id>
    <electorate>Shortland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Makin for his question and for his fierce advocacy for the defence of this nation. Last week's announcement by the Deputy Prime Minister and myself was the most consequential announcement for the surface fleet of the Navy since World War II. Our plan more than doubles the number of major surface combatants from 11 to 26. And it's not just about more vessels; it's about getting them faster.</para>
<para>Under the plan of those opposite when they were in power, we would have had one additional surface combatant vessel by 2024—just one! Under our plan, we'll have four, a quadrupling of the number. Importantly, they'll also be more lethal. The Leader of the Opposition's plan would have delivered 432 missile cells across the surface fleet. By contrast, our plan will deliver between 704 and 880 missile cells. Importantly, we'll sign the acquisition contract for the Hunter class this year, and we'll be cutting steel on the general-purpose frigate in 2026. By contrast, those opposite didn't sign a single new acquisition contract for a major service combatant in their entire sordid 9½ years in government—not a single one!</para>
<para>Importantly, we will also be delivering continuous naval ship building for South Australia. Once the Hunter class is finished, we will immediately follow on with a replacement for the air warfare destroyer. For the first time in the history of this nation, we're securing continuous naval ship building in Western Australia. We're bringing forward the landing craft medium by two years, bringing forward the landing craft heavy by seven years, immediately following on with eight general-purpose frigates and then the large optionally crewed surface vessels. All in all, our plan will support 3,700 direct jobs and thousands more in the supply chain, thousands of well-paid and high skilled jobs contributing to the defence of the nation.</para>
<para>My message to the electrician in Perth or the welder in Adelaide is that you've got decades of work under the Labor government. You can pay a mortgage, you can raise a family and you can contribute to the defence of the nation, secure in the knowledge the Albanese government has got your back. And all this is underpinned by real funding increases. Last week's plan was matched by an $11.1 billion funding increase to the defence budget which builds on the $30 billion of extra funding we provided in last year's budget. This brings the defence budget to 2.4 per cent of GDP over the decade. By contrast, those opposite are still committed to a 2.1 per cent spend on the defence budget. Those opposite are committed to cutting the defence budget by $41 billion and cutting 3,700 jobs. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>New Vehicle Efficiency Standard</title>
          <page.no>67</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LITTLEPROUD</name>
    <name.id>265585</name.id>
    <electorate>Maranoa</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government. Australia's top-selling car brand, Toyota, doesn't domestically sell a single vehicle that will meet the end point of the vehicle efficiency standard required to avoid the new family car tax. Industry analysis shows the popular family SUV the Toyota RAV 4 will be taxed up to an extra $11,000 on every sale. Does the minister agree with the comments by the Minister for Climate Change and Energy that 'no particular model will go up'?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CATHERINE KING</name>
    <name.id>00AMR</name.id>
    <electorate>Ballarat</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Well, here we go again. It's the political party of the '$100 lamb roast'. I had lamb on the weekend, and I don't remember it being $100. It was very nice, thank you very much. It's the party of, 'Whyalla will be wiped off the map.' I haven't been there recently, but I know the Prime Minister has. There are millions of dollars of investment going into Whyalla. And, of course, it's the party of 'the end of the weekend'. Well, here we go again. You cannot believe a single thing these Chicken Littles of Australian politics say—not a single thing. They know the figure that they just quoted has been completely made up. On this side of the House, we want Australians to have greater choice in the new vehicles that they buy and to pay less of their hard earned cash on fuel.</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The Minister will pause. The member for Page, the Leader of The Nationals and the member for Hume, screaming and yelling at someone while they're speaking is not only disrespectful; it's totally against the standing orders. Interjections are one thing, but yelling at someone while they're addressing the parliament is not on. And, to this minister particularly, it happens over and over again. If you want to interject, then interject—but no more yelling.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CATHERINE KING</name>
    <name.id>00AMR</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>As I said, in case you couldn't hear me, you cannot believe a single thing these Chicken Littles of Australian politics actually have to say. On this side of the House, we want Australians to have a greater choice of the new vehicles they buy and to pay less of their hard earned cash in fuel.</para>
<para>We're consulting on a new vehicle efficiency standard that is right for Australia, but Australians have missed out on millions of dollars of fuel savings because of those opposite. They're missing out on millions of dollars of fuel savings they could have been saving now because those opposite lacked the courage to do anything about it. The Leader of the Nationals needs to explain why he thinks that Australia should not have access to cars that are cheaper to run and why he thinks that Australians buying a new car should be paying more at the petrol bowser than those in other comparable countries. Explain why you think that is the case.</para>
<para>Australia has become, as we know, a dumping ground for less modern cars, and everyday Australians are paying more at the petrol bowser because of it. We currently stand alone with Russia as one of the last advanced economies not to have a fuel efficiency standard. The Leader of the Nationals might want to align his policies with those of Russia, but I would rather line up with 85 per cent of countries in the global car market. His own colleagues, frankly, not only supported a standard when in government; they confirmed that it would not push up prices:</para>
<quote><para class="block">So when fuel efficiency standards were introduced in the US, the most popular models before introduction stayed the most popular models after introduction … what we would call utes … There wasn't a material change in price and we don't expect that there would be a material change in price here.</para></quote>
<para>There is not a single cost-of-living measure that those opposite don't want to vote against, including making sure Australians pay less at the petrol bowser. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Workplace Relations</title>
          <page.no>68</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RAE</name>
    <name.id>300122</name.id>
    <electorate>Hawke</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. How has the Albanese Labor government's workplace relations agenda contributed to strong wages growth after a decade of wages being kept deliberately low?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
    <electorate>Watson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Hawke—someone who came to this place campaigning to get wages moving and is now part of a government that wants people to earn more and keep more of what they earn. It was no accident that we had a decade of wage stagnation. There are decisions that governments take that determine whether or not wages move. If you don't advocate for a pay rise for low-paid workers in the annual wage review, if you don't advocate for a pay rise for aged-care workers, if you see a broken bargaining system and you refuse to act to fix it—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Fisher is now warned.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>and if new loopholes turn up and you don't act to close them, you end up with what those opposite got, which is a decade of wage stagnation. The figures that were released last week show that wage growth now is running at roughly double what it averaged for nearly 10 years under the other side. Just as wages flatlining was no accident under them, wages now moving is no accident under this government. Read the ABS section where it goes through what drove that 4.2 per cent figure that came out last week. Two-thirds of the improvements in wage growth came from awards and enterprise agreements—the two measures that are directly affected by amendments to the Fair Work Act and by submissions taken by a government. The actions taken by this government to sunset zombie agreements which were freezing wages and conditions—sometimes back to 2005 levels—has helped to get wages moving. Fixing the bargaining system has helped to get wages moving. Securing record pay rises for workers on the minimum wage and on awards and delivering a 15 per cent pay rise for aged-care workers are all part of that 4.2 per cent figure of getting wages moving again at roughly double what they were under those opposite.</para>
<para>What does that all mean for family budgets around the country? Obviously, people are still doing it tough, but not nearly as tough as they'd be doing it if wages were still stagnant, as they were under those opposite. An average full-time worker now every week earns $120 more than they did when we came to government. Under Labor's tax plan, they'll now get a tax cut of more than $2,100 a year. That's the alternative—having a government where people earn more and keep more of what they earn, versus those opposite committing when they were in government and now still committing in opposition to Australians working longer for less.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation: Fuel</title>
          <page.no>69</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TAYLOR</name>
    <name.id>231027</name.id>
    <electorate>Hume</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Assistant Treasurer. Labor's new family car and ute tax will impose penalties of $100 per gram kilometre. Does the minister agree with the comments of the Minister for Climate Change and Energy that, despite the imposition of his new family car and ute tax, the price of 'no particular model' will go up?</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Once again, this is a very broad question, and it's asking for an opinion—asking, 'Does he agree?' Once again, it falls into that category of asking for an opinion. We're going to allow it. Just so we're clear, under standing order 98, on page 51, questioners must not ask ministers for an expression of opinion. The Leader of the House, on a point of order?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Burke</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I respect that the question is being allowed. At any point this question time, is there going to be a question that goes to the minister who has direct policy carriage? We actually haven't had one.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Resume your seat. That is not a point of order. It may be a question, but it's not a point of order.</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The shadow Treasurer has asked his question. It's going to be allowed. The Assistant Treasurer is going to answer the question, but I suspect it will be—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Fairfax is warned. I'm just going to bring the House back to order. The Assistant Treasurer has the call.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JONES</name>
    <name.id>A9B</name.id>
    <electorate>Whitlam</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the shadow Treasurer for his question, and I note that it's nine months since they've had an assistant treasurer shadow and over that period the Leader of the Opposition has formed the conclusion that there is nobody in his backbench who is good enough to do the job—not one person who is good enough to do the job—a conclusion that everyone on this side of the House concurs with!</para>
<para>Over that nine months, members of the opposition have voted against cheaper medicines and made it quite clear to Australians that they want them to pay more for medicines when they go to the pharmacist's.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The Assistant Treasurer will return to the question.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JONES</name>
    <name.id>A9B</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Indeed I will, because the question the shadow Treasurer asks me is a question about the cost of vehicles. I am pointing out to members of the House that quite clearly they want Australians to pay more for medicines, they want them to pay more for electricity and now, they're making it quite clear, they want them to pay more for petrol as well. The reason that Labor wants to introduce vehicle emissions standards is that we believe that Australians deserve to drive vehicles which use less fuel. If you're using less fuel—</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! Members on my left, the minister was answering a question about vehicles and fuel, which was your question, so you'd better be short and sharp with this response. The member for Hume has the call.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Taylor</name>
    <name.id>231027</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The point of order is relevance. It was a very specific question. It was about Labor's—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Resume your seat. The member for Hume has asked his question. He's skating on thin ice with that point of order. The minister will be heard in silence.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JONES</name>
    <name.id>A9B</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>We're asked why it is that Labor wants to ensure that Australians can drive the most efficient vehicles, and the answer is quite simple. The reason that we want Australians to have access to the most efficient vehicles is that we believe Australians should be paying less to fill up a tank of fuel, as do consumers in any other market around the world. As the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government pointed out to members in this House, Australia is one of the only countries in the world that has not yet introduced mandatory fuel standards. They didn't do it under the nine years that this mob was in government. The Australian people are going to have access to cheaper fuels because we're going to have more efficient cars. Those opposite have made it clear time and time again that they want Australians to pay more for medicine, they want Australians to pay more for electricity and now, they're making it quite clear, they want Australians to pay more money when they fill up at the bowser.</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! There is far too much noise. The member for O'Connor will leave the chamber under 94(a). He's been constantly interjecting during question time. He'll leave the chamber quickly.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The member for O'Connor then left the chamber.</inline></para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation</title>
          <page.no>70</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms DOYLE</name>
    <name.id>299962</name.id>
    <electorate>Aston</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Treasurer. How is the Albanese Labor government working to get wages moving again and ensuring workers keep more of what they earn? How does that compare with previous approaches?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr CHALMERS</name>
    <name.id>37998</name.id>
    <electorate>Rankin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>A big thank you to the member for Aston, who is helping to ensure that every taxpayer in her community and around Australia gets a tax cut—and 87 per cent of the good people of Aston will get a tax cut because of her efforts.</para>
<para>It's very clear in this question time what's going on. Only this side of the House cares about doing something about the cost-of-living pressures that people confront. We know what those opposite are up to. They think if they blow the dog whistle hard enough and if they cuddle up to the far right enough, that the good people of Dunkley won't recognise and won't realise that those opposite have said that they'll wind back our tax cuts, which is what the Deputy Leader of the Opposition has said. They might not care about the cost of living, but we do. We call on the opposition to stop stuffing around in the Senate and to pass the tax cuts that Australians need and deserve.</para>
<para>Australians are under pressure, and we'll get a sense of that in Wednesday's monthly inflation data. Those monthly numbers bounce around a bit, but the direction of travel is clear in the more reliable quarterly numbers. Inflation is moderating since its peak in 2022, but Australians are still under pressure and that's why wages growth is so important and why the tax cuts are so important as well. Our economic plan is all about ensuring Australians earn more and keep more of what they earn. What we saw in last week's data, as the minister said a moment ago, is that real wages growth is back as a feature of our economy—and ahead of schedule.</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Dr CHALMERS</name>
    <name.id>37998</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I say to those interjecting: real wages were falling 3.4 per cent when we came to office and now they're growing again. Average wage growth under this government is now around double what it was under those opposite. That's because our policy is to grow wages and provide tax cuts for every taxpayer. Their policy was to suppress wages and to skew the tax cuts to the highest income earners. New analysis shows average weekly ordinary full-time earnings have increased $119 a week since we came to office. That same worker will get a tax cut of $2,134. That means an extra $6,188 a year for the average full-time worker.</para>
<para>It is now clearer than ever, as those opposite blow the dog whistle and cuddle up to the far right, they have no plan for the cost of living. This side of the house—the Labor government—are the party of higher wages and tax cuts for middle Australia because we believe people should earn more and keep more of what they earn. If those opposite had their way, inflation would be higher, wages would be lower, tax cuts would be smaller and more people would be working longer for less.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gambling Advertising</title>
          <page.no>70</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms DANIEL</name>
    <name.id>008CH</name.id>
    <electorate>Goldstein</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. The Dunkley by-election is this weekend. The late and great Peta Murphy wanted a full ban on gambling ads, saying, 'It needs to be done, with no room for circumvention.' Will the government honour her call?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Goldstein for her question and join with her in honouring the late member for Dunkley. Peta Murphy is sadly missed by not just people in the parliament across the spectrum, but certainly by people in her electorate. She had so much more to offer, and I say to Rod and to her family that I know that the passing of time has not dulled the grief that they are feeling. I was there again yesterday, and people are really doing it tough to lose someone aged just 50. The member for Dunkley made an outstanding contribution in her too-short time in this parliament and we recognise the work she did leading an inquiry into online gambling harm and we're indebted to her for her contribution on what is a critical issue.</para>
<para>We have done substantial work already. We've launched BetStop the national self-exclusion register, through which 18,000 Australians have self-excluded from online wagering and promotions. I table the media release from the Minister for Communications. That has been achieved in just six months. We've mandated customer pre-verification for all new online wagering accounts to prevent children from gambling and strengthen protections for Australians. We've agreed with states and territories on new minimum classifications for video games with gambling-like content. We've implemented new evidence based taglines to replace—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Prime Minister was asked a question and he's answering it regarding the reforms that are occurring, so he is being directly relevant. I know there is one specific part of the question the member has asked, but, under the standing orders I've explained before, as long as the Prime Minister is being directly relevant—and he is—to the core topic. I'll hear from the member for Goldstein.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Daniel</name>
    <name.id>008CH</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>On relevance: the question went to the future, not the past, and a ban on gambling ads.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Prime Minister has the call.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I say, with respect, to the member that I'm talking about things that are being done right now, not the past—things that we are doing as a government to take action, consistent with what the member for Dunkley asked us to do. We have required online wagering companies to send their customers monthly activity statements outlining wins and losses. We legislated a ban on the use of credit cards for gambling last year, and this will come into effect mid this year and will make a real difference. In addition to that, the Minister for Communications and the Minister for Social Services are working diligently through all 31 recommendations contained in the report chaired by the member for Dunkley.</para>
<para>The government are undertaking relevant consultations, as you would expect us to do, with all stakeholders, including harm reduction advocates and industry. I myself have met with people like Tim Costello about these issues, and we're working through them to make sure that any action doesn't have unintended consequences, because that's what good governments do. The government have been working hard on a comprehensive approach to tackling gambling harm because that's what we're committed to doing.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation</title>
          <page.no>71</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MILLER-FROST</name>
    <name.id>296272</name.id>
    <electorate>Boothby</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Women. How will the Albanese Labor government's tax cuts support women to earn more and to keep more of what they earn?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CATHERINE KING</name>
    <name.id>00AMR</name.id>
    <electorate>Ballarat</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Boothby for her question. Her long and distinguished career in the social services sector means that she is an incredibly important asset to this place, particularly when it comes to vulnerable Australians but also on issues around the cost of living.</para>
<para>Labor does want people to earn more and to keep more of what they earn. We know that those opposite want people to work longer for less. That's what those opposite want. Under Labor, wages growth is double what it averaged under the Liberals and Nationals, and this wages growth means that women are earning more, and our tax reforms of course mean that they will get to keep more of what they earn. And, under Labor, the gender pay gap has dropped, again, to a record low, with the ABS reporting last week that the gender pay gap has dropped to 12 per cent. This shows that Labor's deliberate efforts to support women's economic equality are working, with very real and tangible benefits. That is because women's economic equality is a core priority for this government. These things do not happen by accident. It's because of the work that we've done in industrial relations reform, the work that we've done in gender pay equity and the work that we've done in supporting aged-care workers. All of that matters in making sure that we get that gender pay gap down.</para>
<para>We know that tomorrow the Workplace Gender Equality Agency will be publishing employer-level gender pay gap reports. This is a first for Australia, and it will give employees greater visibility of how their workplaces are performing, and increase the transparency and focus on employers to accelerate change. This is on top of the reforms, as I said, that we've made in industrial relations to improve how it works for women—reforms that are making a difference to women's lives.</para>
<para>Of course, our tax cuts will put more money back into the pockets of Australian women to provide cost-of-living relief. Our plan will see Australian women taxpayers on average receiving a tax cut of $1,649 from 1 July, and it will see a bigger tax cut for 90 per cent of Australian women taxpayers, who will be receiving an additional tax cut of $707. That is 5.8 million Australian women across the country.</para>
<para>We know that women work hard across our economy, and we want to ensure that they keep more of that hard earned money to meet the daily challenges and cost-of-living pressures that they face. Under Labor's plan, childcare workers, disability carers and aged-care workers are some of the most likely to benefit from these tax cuts, with 95 per cent of those workers benefiting. These changes will ensure that those in Middle Australia get to keep more of the money that they earn without adding to inflation. Labor will always work hard for women, and soon the minister will release— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>New Vehicle Efficiency Standard</title>
          <page.no>72</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TED O'BRIEN</name>
    <name.id>138932</name.id>
    <electorate>Fairfax</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question goes to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. Why, during Labor's cost-of-living crisis, is the government proposing a tax increase of $15,000 on the price of a new Toyota Hilux?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
    <electorate>McMahon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I deeply appreciate the question from the member for Fairfax. I also think it should be noted that I appreciate the bravery of the Manager of Opposition Business for allowing that question. Not every manager of opposition business, with everything he has on the record, would be strong enough to allow those questions to be asked! The member asked me about price increases under a fuel efficiency standard or new vehicle efficiency standard. I refer the honourable member to the impact statement that the minister for transport and I released several weeks ago, which says and makes clear:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… the evidence to date consistently finds no purchase price impact, or a negligible purchase price impact, for consumers …</para></quote>
<para>That's based on the experience right around the world. But, to be fair to the impact analysis, others have said it better. Others have said it much more eloquently than I have. For example, when it has been tried in the past in Australia to implement this important reform, it was pointed out:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… when fuel efficiency standards were introduced in the US, the most popular models before introduction stayed the most popular models after introduction. … There wasn't a material change in price and we don't expect that there would be a material change in price here.</para></quote>
<para>That was the member for Bradfield. The Manager of Opposition Business is still in charge of the tactics. He was a strong advocate. He put the case very strongly and very eloquently. There was a joint op-ed in the <inline font-style="italic">Australian</inline> between the member for Bradfield and the then member for Kooyong, the former future Prime Minister. The headline was 'Clean air and cars can be a much healthier mix'. I table the op-ed, because the member for Bradfield was on a roll. He said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Fuel efficiency standards are about reducing fuel costs and carbon emissions at the same time. Eighty per cent of the global vehicle passenger fleet is subject to fuel efficiency standards, but Australia has none.</para></quote>
<para>He's right. This is not a radical policy. These standards have been in place. This is where prices have not gone up. Standards have been in place in the United States since 1975—almost as long as the member for Fairfax and I have both been alive—in Japan since 1985, China 2005, South Korea 2006, the European Union 2009 and Canada 2011. Vehicle emissions standards were introduced in Mexico in 2013 and India in 2014—those woke warriors, those well-known renewable energy inner-city dwellers! The government of Saudi Arabia introduced fuel efficiency standards in 2016, and New Zealand did in 2023. It is well beyond time for Australia to catch up. It is well beyond time for Australia's consumers to have access to the same choices that 85 per cent of motorists around the world get but that motorists in Australia and Russia do not.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Aged Care</title>
          <page.no>72</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LAXALE</name>
    <name.id>299174</name.id>
    <electorate>Bennelong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Aged Care and for Sport. How is the Albanese Labor government helping our crucial aged-care workers to earn more and keep more of what they earn?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WELLS</name>
    <name.id>264121</name.id>
    <electorate>Lilley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Bennelong for his question. Last week he and I met with aged-care workers in his electorate at Uniting Arrunga in Ermington. One of the many reasons that I am proud to be a member of this government is that we prioritised aged-care workers and people like Joan, who the member for Bennelong and I met last. Joan is a personal-care worker who works and lives in the electorate of Bennelong. Joan told us that she started working in aged care more than ten years ago with her friends Christie, Melinda and Judy. When they began working in aged care last decade, Joan and her friends were receiving less than $20 per hour. Imagine that—being paid less than $20 per hour to do some of the most valuable and yet demanding work that we have in this country. But Joan stuck with it because she loves her job and because she loves the people who she looks after. This year, for the very first time, Joan was able to tell us that her pay now exceeds $30 an hour. That is because the Albanese government made a commitment to back workers like Joan, like Christie, like Melinda and like Judy in the Fair Work Commission to get a meaningful pay rise. And that is what we did. That commitment has meant that personal care workers like Joan are now taking home an additional $141 per week, or more than $7,300 every year.</para>
<para>On this side we recognise that there are tough economic realities at play at the moment. That is the difference between us and those opposite; we are determined to help. We are providing even more cost-of-living relief by making sure that people like Joan and her friends can earn more and keep more of what they earn. From 1 July, Labor's tax cuts will also deliver personal-care workers in aged care an $1,166 tax cut, almost double what they were due to receive from the coalition. This investment in aged-care workers is paying dividends for the older people in their care.</para>
<para>Under the Albanese government there is now a registered nurse onsite in aged care 98.7 per cent of the time, on average—that is, 23.69 hours a day. Older people are receiving an additional 2.16 million minutes of care every single day. And there has been reduction in the number of pressure injuries in aged care, in the number of physical restraints used in aged care and in significant unplanned weight loss in aged care. We are also seeing improvements in our star ratings data, with fewer one- and two-star rated facilities and more four- and five-star rated facilities.</para>
<para>Today, I met with the CEO of Dementia Australia, and she said that her members who live with dementia who rely on the aged-care system, who rely on personal care workers are seeing real differences on the ground now. And it's thanks to people like Joan.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Universities</title>
          <page.no>73</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SPENDER</name>
    <name.id>286042</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is for the Minister for Education. Last May, the crossbench wrote to you with concerns about indexation of HECS and HELP loans, which are now over seven per cent. HECS indexation has risen faster than the average home loan and will cost the average 20- to 29-year-old more than $2,000 extra this year. Last year, we asked you to change the way the loans were indexed and to link them to a lower rate or to wage price index. Yesterday, the Universities Accord recommended the same thing. When will the government change the way HECS and HELP loans are indexed and calculated, and provide real financial support to young people who are going backwards?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CLARE</name>
    <name.id>HWL</name.id>
    <electorate>Blaxland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Wentworth for her question. Without doubt, she is the best member for Wentworth this parliament has ever had. Even the Liberal Party agree. That's why they're trying to get you to join the Liberal Party. I'd take that as a compliment though, because they realise that they can't beat you. My advice is don't do it, or, better still, watch <inline font-style="italic">Nemesis</inline> and then you'd never do it.</para>
<para>Can I recognise, Mr Speaker, your abiding interest in this topic, as well as all topics in education. I recognise, also, and the work that you did before you came into parliament with the Australian Business and Community Network that has helped a lot of young people from my neck of the woods to get access to business communities and work experience in the time that they're at high school. I really mean that. That counts. It does make a difference in the things I was talking about in answer to the other question about helping to make sure that kids from the outer suburbs and poor backgrounds make that big step to university.</para>
<para>I said earlier that Bob Hawke and Paul Keating had helped more people to finish high school and that now we need more people to go to university. I should have mentioned John Dawkins as well, because the fact is that HECS has blown the doors of universities open for more young Australians. Back then, in 1989, when I was finishing high school, only about five per cent of the Australian workforce had a uni degree. Now it's more than 26 per cent. What this report says—and I'm going directly to it, I can promise you.</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The minister will pause. The member for Wentworth, on a point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Spender</name>
    <name.id>286042</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The point is on relevance. I appreciate the flattery, but I think it is time to get to the question of HECS/HELP.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The minister was in mid-sentence saying he was getting to that point, so he is being directly relevant. I'm sure he was going to come back to the question. He has the call.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CLARE</name>
    <name.id>HWL</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>You're a mind reader, Mr Speaker. I was right on it. What the report says is that HECS is fundamentally sound and that it has served our country well but that we can make it fairer and simpler. It's got recommendations there for the government about changes to indexation as well as repayments. My answer to your question is the answer I gave to the House about an hour ago, which is that we're going through all of the 47 recommendations in the report and we'll announce the first stage of our response to the Universities Accord over the next few months.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Wages</title>
          <page.no>73</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MASCARENHAS</name>
    <name.id>298800</name.id>
    <electorate>Swan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Workplace Relations. What progress has the Albanese Labor government made toward closing the gender pay gap? What reforms have contributed to this?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
    <electorate>Watson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I really want to thank the member for Swan, someone who has been committed to acting on closing the gender pay gap not just since she got here but right back to her time in the resources industry. She has always been so strong on it.</para>
<para>The data last week showed that the gender pay gap is now the lowest it's ever been on record, down at 12 per cent. It had averaged 15.4 per cent under the previous government and is now down to 12. That's at the same time that a whole lot of women have been entering the workforce; more than 330,000 extra women are now in jobs since the election. Interestingly, 57 per cent of those new jobs are full time under this government.</para>
<para>It hasn't happened by accident or by coincidence. It's because of a deliberate design feature of this government wanting not only for wages to get moving but also for that to happen in a way that the gender pay gap is closing. Some of the actions have been obviously targeted at pay and pay for women, like fixing the bargaining system to get wages moving, particularly in feminised industries, which is what we did with the Secure Jobs, Better Pay legislation. We also changed the law in that same bill to put gender equality at the heart of the Fair Work Commission's decision-making. We backed and we funded the 15 per cent pay rise for aged-care workers. An overwhelming majority of workers in that industry are women. We also banned pay secrecy clauses. Many people here from all sorts of jobs know the exact connection in how pay secrecy has been used so that women in a workplace don't find out how much more their colleagues are earning than they are. That's now banned because of legislation put through by this government—opposed, I might add, by those opposite.</para>
<para>But there's also a second group of changes, not only the ones that were directly aimed at wages but a set of changes directly aimed at improving participation: expanding access to flexible work arrangements, making early childhood education and child care cheaper and more accessible for 96 per cent of families and delivering the biggest boost to paid parental leave since it was introduced. All of these measure mean that not only have we taken action to make sure that women are paid more; we've made it easier for women who want to return to the workforce and participate in the workforce to do so.</para>
<para>That now means the average woman working full time in Australia earns $135 a week more than when we came to office and, under the tax plan, will get a tax cut of almost $2,000. That's how we've managed to get the gender pay gap to the lowest level that's ever been recorded. But, as far as this government's concerned, that job is not yet done. There's more to go— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>New Vehicle Efficiency Standard</title>
          <page.no>74</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WOLAHAN</name>
    <name.id>235654</name.id>
    <electorate>Menzies</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. I refer to Labor's new family car and ute tax. Last year—</para>
<para>Government members interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! Members on my right, there is far too much noise. If members on my right continue to interject, they will leave the chamber. I don't know how many times I have to tell everyone. Questions are going to be heard in silence, and then ministers will be given the same courtesy. Out of respect for the member for Menzies, he'll begin his question again.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WOLAHAN</name>
    <name.id>235654</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. I refer to Labor's new family car and ute tax. Last year—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The member will resume his seat. On the point of order, the Leader of the House?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Burke</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>At question time, ministers can be asked about issues within their responsibility. They can't be asked about something fictitious. He's referring to a policy that does not exist.</para>
<para>Government members interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! Members on my right. The member for Macnamara is warned. I can't make any member phrase a question as I see fit. It's up to that individual and, obviously, the minister can respond accordingly. We've had this issue before over the last couple of weeks. I just ask for everyone to temper their language and, for the third time, I ask the member for Menzies to get to his question and be heard in silence.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WOLAHAN</name>
    <name.id>235654</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy, and I refer to Labor's new family car and ute tax. Last year, in my home state of Victoria, 78 per cent of sales were either SUVs or light commercial vehicles and utes. The top-selling cars were the Ford Ranger, Toyota HiLux and Isuzu D-MAX. Industry analysis shows that they would attract penalties of $17,000, $14,000 and $13,000, respectively, by 2029. Why does this Labor government want to punish Australians for their choices?</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
    <electorate>McMahon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Again, I very much appreciate the question. In fact, I suspect that I appreciate being asked it more than the member appreciates being asked to ask it, because he's been put in a rather tricky situation. What we're about is giving Australians more choice and more fuel-efficient vehicles. In fact, for electorates that are in outer-urban areas or regional areas, they save more in fuel costs by having more efficient cars because they drive more. Again, that is a fact, but others have said it more eloquently than I have. The member for Bradfield wrote in the <inline font-style="italic">Australian</inline>:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Given the long distances travelled in regional Australia, the savings could be even greater for people living outside the main cities.</para></quote>
<para>When he's good, the member for Bradfield's good, isn't he!</para>
<para>Again, I have to confess that I quoted the member for Bradfield earlier and I left a sentence out, which I shouldn't have done. I talked about how in the United States, as the member for Bradfield was arguing, demand for cars was the same before fuel efficiency standards than after, but he actually went into more detail than that. He said—and I'll give the full quote:</para>
<quote><para class="block">So when fuel efficiency standards were introduced in the US, the most popular models before introduction stayed the most popular models after introduction.</para></quote>
<para>And this is what I felt left out last time:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Essentially, what Americans call pickup trucks and what we'd call utes, like the Chevy Silverado. There wasn't a material change in price and we don't expect that there would be a material change in price here.</para></quote>
<para>We've got an opposition that is so negative that, while they oppose our polices—which is fair enough; we're used to that—they oppose their own policies as well. I suspect the opposition could do with looking at how some groups have responded to this policy, groups that actually represent the interests of motorists, like Australia's oldest motoring group, the NRMA, who said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The NRMA welcomes the Australian Government's announcement and we are pleased that a responsible and achievable option over time is being presented to the Australian people.</para></quote>
<para>That is from the chief executive of the NRMA, which has been standing up for motorists since 1920, which is about 104 more years than those opposite, because they actually don't stand up for Australian motorists. And CHOICE, who stand up for Australian consumers across the board, said the absence of standards in Australia has made Australia 'an unattractive market for more efficient vehicle manufacturers'.</para>
<para>CHOICE stands up for consumers. The NRMA stands up for consumers and motorists. This side of the House stands up for consumers and motorists. That side of the House just stands for scare campaigns which won't survive contact with reality.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Health Care</title>
          <page.no>75</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COKER</name>
    <name.id>263547</name.id>
    <electorate>Corangamite</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Health and Aged Care. How is the Albanese Labor government working to ensure Australians have access to the health services they need, and why is it important to strengthen Medicare after a decade of cuts and neglect?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUTLER</name>
    <name.id>HWK</name.id>
    <electorate>Hindmarsh</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Corangamite for that question. She is such a huge advocate for Australian workers earning more and keeping more of what they are. She also knows that the wage figures that were released last week showed that workers in health care and social assistance saw their wages rise last year by 5½ per cent.</para>
<para>From 1 July, Labor will deliver every single healthcare worker in the country a tax cut to help with the cost of living. That'll help the hundreds and hundreds of Australians working hard right now at the Frankston Hospital in south-east Melbourne. A second-year registered nurse at that hospital will get a tax cut of $1,550—double what they would have received under the Morrison government plan. A hospital orderly at the Frankston Hospital will get a tax cut $862, compared to just $58 under those opposite, or $1 a week—a miserly $1 a week. There will be more orderlies and more nurses working at the Frankston Hospital after the redevelopment of that hospital is completed next year. It's the largest ever health project in south-east Melbourne delivered by the Victorian Labor government. And that new, bigger, more modern hospital will be working with more funds from the Commonwealth, after the Prime Minister agreed with National Cabinet to a new hospital funding formula that will deliver at least $13 billion in additional funding to Australia's hospitals, like the one at Frankston.</para>
<para>But I'm not the only one out there right now talking about hospital funding. There's another ad doing the rounds down in Dunkley right now trumpeting the former government's allegedly terrific performance on funding hospitals. And it's labelled 'fact', so of course it must be right. But there are a few salient facts not included in the ad, like the fact that the Leader of the Opposition in his first budget as health minister cut $700 million from Victorian hospitals. That was just a small downpayment for the $50 billion that he planned to cut from hospitals over a decade, set out in this glossy budget document from 2014. I regret to say that this Leader of the Opposition is becoming a serial offender when it comes to spurious claims about his record as health minister—talking a big game on bulk billing without telling anyone that he planned to abolish the thing altogether or taking credit for headspace services that had been funded years earlier by the Gillard government in the 2011 budget.</para>
<para>The truth is that this Leader of the Opposition, when he was health minister, delivered only one thing, and that was cuts to the health system. And the Australian people will never forget it.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Albanese</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the <inline font-style="italic">Notice Paper</inline>.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORTS</title>
        <page.no>76</page.no>
        <type>AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Report Nos 17 and 18 of 2023-24</title>
          <page.no>76</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present the Auditor-General's reports Nos 17 and 18 for 2023-24. Details of the reports will be recorded in the <inline font-style="italic">Votes and Proceedings</inline>.</para>
<para>Documents made parliamentary papers.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DOCUMENTS</title>
        <page.no>76</page.no>
        <type>DOCUMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Presentation</title>
          <page.no>76</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
    <electorate>Watson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Documents are tabled in accordance with the list circulated to honourable members earlier today. Full details of the documents will be recorded in the <inline font-style="italic">Votes and Proceedings</inline>.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>76</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Help to Buy Bill 2023, Help to Buy (Consequential Provisions) Bill 2023</title>
          <page.no>76</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <p>
              <a href="r7123" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Help to Buy Bill 2023</span>
                </p>
              </a>
            </p>
            <a href="r7124" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Help to Buy (Consequential Provisions) Bill 2023</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>76</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PERRETT</name>
    <name.id>HVP</name.id>
    <electorate>Moreton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Labor's Help to Buy scheme, to be established by the Help to Buy Bill 2023, is fulfilling my commitment to the people of Moreton to help make it easier for them to purchase their first home. The Albanese government will support eligible homebuyers with an equity contribution of 40 per cent for new homes and 30 per cent for existing homes. This scheme has received national agreement from the states, who will seek to progress legislation so that the scheme can be implemented nationally. One of the joys of having a federation is that we have different land registrations. Smart states like Queensland and South Australia have the Torrens system, but the other states are a little bit different.</para>
<para>Home ownership is so important to the short-, medium- and long-term economic security of Australians' future, and that is why we're committed to using the tools at our disposal to make it easier for Australians to buy a home. A total of 40,000 places will be available over four years. That's 10,000 places per year. This measure won't overheat the market. It is targeted and efficient relief and will be life-changing for Australians looking to buy a home.</para>
<para>The Help to Buy scheme is one of a raft of measures that we've implemented to make housing more accessible and affordable. Despite the warbling and whinging from those opposite, change does not happen overnight. After 10 years of neglect, we have a lot of catching up to do when it comes to building affordable housing. As all the sensible people who deal with the housing industry know, supply, supply, supply is the solution.</para>
<para>This scheme will give those on low and middle incomes an opportunity to buy a home with at least a two per cent deposit. The ability for homeowners to put down a two per cent deposit will mean that it'll be far easier to save for a deposit and it will help those who are looking to buy a home get into one sooner, especially while paying rent. If you talk to any young people that have moved out of home, it's almost impossible for them to get ahead and get a deposit together to go into a home. One of the biggest barriers to homeownership is saving up for that deposit, so making the deposit as low as possible is a crucial step in making housing more accessible.</para>
<para>Homeownership represents more than just four walls and a roof. It represents stability, it represents achievement, it represents community and it also represents wealth that you can pass on to the next generation. The neglect the coalition showed our housing sector shows the contempt that they have everyday Australians. Help to Buy will make a significant and tangible improvement to housing security and affordability for those most marginalised in the housing market. Anyone who does not support this is not serious about making tangible improvements to people's lives.</para>
<para>The Grattan Institute released an article in 2022 expressing the need for a shared-equity scheme. It said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">A national shared equity scheme would help level the playing field for first home buyers …</para></quote>
<para>This program gives a 40 per cent stake to those buying their first home. Not only is a shared-equity scheme a solid way of lessening the strain; it is also one of the practical measures that will help to ease this issue without any unintended consequences.</para>
<para>The Productivity Commission says:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The bottom line is that rent control is not an effective way to improve affordability for renters.</para></quote>
<para>So, despite the Greens political party attempting to politicise another issue because it suits their agenda, the facts are very clear. If you want to help low- and middle-income Australians into homes, the key is to lower the barriers to entry for that group. Instead of the slogans, spin and ranting of the Greens political party or the negativity and naysaying of the coalition, Labor is offering a solid, fact-driven policy that will have a material impact on everyday Australians.</para>
<para>It's disappointing to hear the Greens political party is out there planning to vote against this in the House of Representatives. It's going to delay the housing dream for so many Australians. It's not millions of Australians. It's only 10,000. But that's 10,000 lives that can be changed and so can the households connected with them. By delaying this legislation, the Greens are saying no to Australians in suburbs and towns across the country, they're saying no to young Australians looking to buy their first homes and they are saying no to the stability of Australia's housing future. I remind the Greens political party that way back in 2019, when Labor candidates like me were out there prosecuting the case for a range of reforms on tax, including negative gearing, the Greens were nowhere to be seen when it came to campaigning on negative gearing. They were busy with Bob Brown's convoy, scaring the hell out of regional Queenslanders and doing all they could to make sure a reforming Labor government wasn't elected. I think as a political party they are experts when it comes to product differentiation, but they're never there when it comes to the hard, realistic reform. Vultures for votes and division, harvesting hatred and saying, 'Divide, divide, divide'—that's their only point.</para>
<para>Participants in Labor's Help to Buy scheme will not be dictated to by the government. Instead, we'll just act as a second mortgage holder. Owner will still be able to renovate without needing special permission from a bureaucrat or Housing Australia. Also, anyone looking to increase their stake in the property is able to buy out the government in five per cent increments if they so choose. These options show that we are dedicated to ensuring that the dream of homeownership can be fulfilled and that the government will not stand in the way of people making their own choices about their own properties. Participants will also be able to seek an adjustment to the proportion of ownership if renovations are made and they reflect an additional capital value added to the property. This means that the government will not be benefiting from your renovations. You can have the freedom to improve your own home as you choose, as circumstances permit.</para>
<para>Homeownership is still an essential part of the great Australian dream, though I do wonder. My older son is 18. When I talk to his generation about the chances of getting into a house without a mum-and-dad bank, it seems an impossible dream, apart from collectivising and all sorts of things. That's why this Albanese government is committed to keeping homeownership in reach for that generation and for as many Australians as possible. The Help to Buy scheme ensures that people on low and middle incomes have a leg-up when it comes to buying their first home. We're providing targeted and efficient support to those looking for their first home. We're encouraging people to build homes, doing our bit for supply, by offering a higher equity share for those who are willing to build. We're making saving easier by requiring only a two per cent deposit. These measures prove our dedication to helping more Australians get a roof over their head.</para>
<para>We're not here to spend our time shouting slogans, like the Greens political party does, nor are we shouting no to every measure that will provide relief to Australians, especially when it comes to housing, like the coalition does. As the sensible government, we're here to implement strong, targeted reform aimed squarely at helping everyday Australians. Here's the thing: the Help to Buy scheme is only one pillar of our broader housing strategy, combined with our $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund, the $3 billion social housing accelerator payment and the largest increase to Commonwealth rental assistance in 30 years. It is critical that we get housing on track, and that's why we have multiple schemes aimed at various areas of this sector.</para>
<para>If this bill is delayed in the Senate because the Greens political party wants to pay politics, that will only make the situation worse. Delays mean fewer people building their first home. Delays mean more pressure on the rental market and, consequently, rents increasing above market. Delays mean a worse outcome for the Australian people. The Labor government will not delay. We will act in the best interests of the Australian people because we are committed to a better future for all Australians, and giving them four walls and a roof is a big part of that. I commend this bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr STEVENS</name>
    <name.id>176304</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Moreton for his contribution, particularly for outlining some of the deficiencies in the policy positions of the Greens when it comes to housing, but I caution the member for Moreton that the last time those opposite did anything on housing in this chamber they ended up negotiating with the Greens and agreeing on half of their crazy policies in the Senate, before the Housing Australia Future Fund came back to be passed with all of the kooky demands of the Greens. Whilst it's nice to hear those opposite currently being cognisant of the frightening approach to housing that is encapsulated by the policy positions of the Greens, I predict there's a very good chance that the government will be negotiating with the Greens on this bill, because they have to—to give it any chance of passing in the Senate, they're going to sit down with the Greens and go through this list of Greens policies, which, as the member for Moreton just pointed out, are dangerous and unsustainable for the market. We'll find out, I suppose, what sort of a price has to be paid by the government to get support for this housing policy, much like we did when the Housing Australia Future Fund came back to this chamber last year.</para>
<para>We in the coalition hold the same concern about the approach of the Greens. Equally, I am greatly heartened to hear the government now saying that their concerns, when it comes to addressing challenges in the housing sector, are those of supply. In the last parliament, I served on the Standing Committee on Tax and Revenue inquiry into housing affordability, and certainly the coalition's position, which can be read in the report of that committee, was that supply was the No. 1 challenge when it came to housing affordability within our economy. The Labor Party members, then in opposition, had a different view back then—and I'm talking about only two years ago—than they do now in government. The housing minister said in question time in the last sitting week that the solution was 'supply, supply, supply'. Well, that was what we had to say in our report, and the Labor Party members disputed that very forcefully through the evidence as it was being heard, the questions that were asked and the witnesses that were being interrogated. The then opposition now government's own position on that inquiry—Alan Kohler quotes their previous position in that report in an essay that he wrote recently with a degree of significance on this topic. The government now say that the challenges are supply, supply, supply.</para>
<para>It would be great to see some policy positions from the government that are about supply, because we in the coalition certainly hold the view that supply is the great challenge, and solving it has a great deal of complexity, and not a lot of it is in the hands of the Commonwealth government. We obviously know that state governments and even local governments have a very significant role to play when it comes to the main levers of supply, which are land release and the rezoning of land, putting blocks out into markets so that hopefully you can get a matching of the supply of housing stock to the demand for it. We certainly have a government that is dramatically increasing migration into the country, putting an enormous amount of pressure on the housing sector not just from a supply point of view but from a cost point of view as well.</para>
<para>There are a lot of things that could be done on those levers. But, as we found in question time today, there are no solutions or suggestions of any adjustments to those policy settings from the answers to the questions that were asked. So we now have a solution where the main lever, that being supply, is not on the government's agenda whatsoever, and we have a housing bill before us here, this Help to Buy bill, which does nothing to increase the supply of new housing stock into the market.</para>
<para>The Liberal Party is the party of homeownership, and it was the great Sir Robert Menzies, the founder of the Liberal Party, of course, who in his 'Forgotten people' speech talked about the aspiration of homeownership and the great sense of economic security and economic empowerment that a family gets from owning their own home. Indeed, his government transformed the statistics when it came to homeownership for Australians. That was a great, golden era of prosperity, when people had a reasonable expectation of job security and housing security by purchasing a home, paying it off with a fair degree of stability and therefore having independence for themselves and their family.</para>
<para>We know that the Left of politics—and the Greens are embodying this and at least being honest about it right now—don't want people to have that kind of economic security. They want people to be reliant on government. If you're in the Left of politics and you love big government, you want people to rely on government and you want people to need big government to look after them and do everything for them. If you're in the Right of politics, you want people to have economic independence so that they can make their own decisions about themselves, their family and their future and not be reliant on government as frequently and as broadly as possible.</para>
<para>That's what homeownership achieves for someone. If you've got a stable job and income; if you own your own home, with debt to a bank but at a sustainable level so that you know you're going to be able to pay it off before you get to the end of your career; and indeed—I add the third pillar—if you've got superannuation and savings for your retirement so that you can support yourself comfortably in retirement, then you've got economic security and a great deal of economic independence. That's why the aspiration to homeownership is so important, and it's great shame that we don't have policy measures and bills coming before this parliament that are addressing that in any meaningful way whatsoever.</para>
<para>I commend the lead coalition speaker on the bill, the member for Deakin, for how he has articulated the coalition's position—in particular, what he discussed about the serious drawbacks and concerns that we have when it comes to this shared-equity scheme. There are a lot of questions that he put on the record that maybe the minister might address in the second-reading conclusion speech. We'll wait and see. But we have significant concern about a range of elements of the detail of this, which the lead speaker articulated.</para>
<para>We don't want people to get trapped in this scheme. We don't want people to be tricked into this scheme, not fully understanding what they might be exposed to because we have no idea what the consequences might be for a range of scenarios that are not outlined in any way, shape or form in the specifics of the legislation here and may or may not come in the regulations et cetera that are yet to be revealed to us. We certainly don't want to see people who are most vulnerable economically being trapped and/or tricked by a scheme like this. We know that the states hold the levers in this area of policy, which is why the Commonwealth government needs the states to participate in this. The states are the only ones that can ultimately enact it. A lot of the states have their own shared equity schemes that are dramatically undersubscribed. 'Undersubscribed' is a euphemism for 'not working'. There are plenty of schemes operating around the country that are offering to participate in a shared equity framework from state governments that people are just not signing up to. Why is it that this scheme is going to be any different from the state schemes, one wonders.</para>
<para>There are two essential challenges to purchasing your home: saving the deposit and, of course, meeting the cost of servicing the mortgage. We know that both of those are as challenging as each other for people in the current economic climate. High interest rates mean that, when banks look at serviceability of mortgages, the amount that they can lend to people has reduced dramatically through the interest rate hike cycle that we've seen since this government came to power. Of course, there is a very hot property market, which is driven by a lot of factors, including the very high immigration rate, and running a very high level of demand for property, both rental and purchasing, at the same time that supply isn't matching it means that the growth in the average price of a home makes not only meeting the mortgage but also saving for the deposit very challenging.</para>
<para>This scheme talks about very low levels of minimum equity in a home, and we know that banks are very comfortable when you've saved about 20 per cent of the equity for the capital purchase price of a home. That's how you can ensure you don't get things like mortgage insurance costs et cetera, and it puts people in the best position to be competitive in getting the lowest rate and having the safest level of borrowing and burden on them. When we think of all the other taxes that are put in place, particularly by state governments, like stamp duty et cetera, to save 20 per cent of the value of the average home right now is bitterly challenging for people. Then to have thought, 'This is what I need to save in order to buy a home,' and in the current market find that the sort of home you want to buy has dramatically increased in cost over the last two to five years that you might have been saving that equity and then equally find that the amount you were planning on borrowing is not going to be approved by the bank anymore because the amount that interest rates have gone up in that same period of time means that your income now can't support the mortgage burden that it could a few years ago—literally millions of Australians have had the dream of homeownership evaporate on them over the last 18 months to two years. This bill does absolutely nothing for those people, and some speakers talk about this being a pillar of the government's housing policy. If this is a pillar policy to address something as dramatic as the housing affordability crisis in our economy, that is absolutely shameful.</para>
<para>Even in success—and we dispute the likelihood of success of this bill—this will help 10,000 people a year to buy a home, and this is a pillar of the government's approach to addressing housing affordability and helping all those people with a dream of owning their own home and getting the economic security of homeownership. A pillar of the government's approach is, in success, helping 10,000 people a year buy a home. This problem stretches into the millions. There are millions of people who have dreams to buy homes that are unfulfilled.</para>
<para>We've had all sorts of claims and promises, particularly in election campaigns, about things that this is government is going to do, and they always involve things like hitting all these heroic targets that are miraculously beyond the election cycle. Unfortunately, we can't mark any report card on these sorts of things come the next election. All these things are going to be achieved in the years and years beyond that. This is another example of that. The government has delayed the introduction of this legislation. This scheme was meant to be starting in January 2023, and, just to be clear, it's February 2024 and we're debating it in the lower house, to be negotiated and potentially passed, or not, in the Senate probably in months and months time. That will mean the success of this policy will not be known whenever the next election is held.</para>
<para>The pollsters probably said to the campaign strategists: 'Housing affordability is a big deal; we've got to have some policy positions on it. Think of something that you can say that will sound good on a TV commercial and look good on a billboard, but, of course, has no substance or likelihood of making any dent in the significant challenge of this policy area.' This bill is exactly in that category. I suspect it was dreamt up in the heat of the election campaign because someone said, 'We don't have anything to say on housing and housing affordability,' and this was the best they could come up with when no-one did the hard, dedicated policy work of coming up with genuine, serious solutions to this very substantial, significant challenge we face. That's not dissimilar to a lot of other things that were said by the Labor Party at the last election.</para>
<para>We don't support this bill. We know that there is a huge challenge when it comes to housing affordability and people accessing and achieving the great Australian dream. And it should be more than just a dream; it should be a reality for all Australians to have an ambition to own their own home. It would be good for the government to bring some legislation before this parliament that would actually have a likelihood of making any form of meaningful impact on that. This certainly doesn't. We don't support it, and I won't support the second reading passage of the bill.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MASCARENHAS</name>
    <name.id>298800</name.id>
    <electorate>Swan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>One of the things that I'll point out as an engineer in the House is that when you've got pillars you don't have a pillar in isolation; you'd probably call that a pole. When we talk about pillars, you have several pillars when you create the structure of a building. You have multiple pillars, and so we have multiple policies.</para>
<para>One of the things that happened when we stepped into this place was that we saw a decade of sleeping at the wheel and mismanagement. What our housing policies do in the suite of policies we have is look at short-term, medium-term and long-term policies. That's what we've been doing, and this is one of the policies that we can enact in a short period of time that makes a real difference to individuals. This is what we do. We are a government that are not just thinking about tomorrow; we are also thinking about the housing stock in 2030. I am proud to be part of a government that is looking at multiple solutions. The thing that I would say I do agree with the member for Sturt on is that housing is a concern in our communities, and it's something that we need to be acting upon.</para>
<para>I love having the opportunity to stand here and talk about the Albanese government's measures to address the housing concerns across the country. This is a commitment that we made at the election, and it's a promise that we're keeping because we understand how important housing is to the wellbeing of individuals. We understand the importance of safe and affordable housing. It's central to the wellbeing of all Australians, it's central to the security of all Australians and it's central to the dignity of all Australians.</para>
<para>I remember a quote from a <inline font-style="italic">7.30</inline> report from a man that was facing homelessness. He said, 'It is difficult to find the will to live when I have no place to live.' The thing that we need to make sure we do is have a look at the system as a whole and look at the way that we unlock housing opportunities for different people. That's exactly what the Help to Buy Bill does.</para>
<para>Having a safe home is something that we're all entitled to, and, sadly, after years of neglectful policy under the former Liberal government, this is not the case for all Australians. Many Australians, and this includes people in my electorate of Swan, cannot find an affordable place to buy. For those with a mortgage, it has been really difficult, and, for those renting in a very tight rental market, it has been a very tough time.</para>
<para>We're fully conscious of the difficulties being faced by many people around the country. I'm fully conscious of the difficulties being faced by people in my electorate. I'm doing what I can as their representative and their community leader to help those that are doing it tough.</para>
<para>Just last week we had a forum in the electorate in Riverdale and we brought along a raft of service providers and community support workers to provide information and advice to those who have been struggling with household budgets. I did this with the wonderful member for Belmont, Cassie Rowe. We also had the local government mayor, Robert Rossi, present. It was an example of what we can do when we—federal, state and local governments—work together and the private and not-for-profit sectors work together, pitting their resources and efforts together, to provide a package of support measures to help Australians. This is what I'm about as a community leader. I actively want to work with my community at a local level to make a real difference to their lives.</para>
<para>Unfortunately, this is something that was quite lacking under my predecessor. Often Liberal MPs prefer to sit in their ivory towers, with maybe lots of pillars in their towers, and dictate. They fail to consider the impact their actions or their policies will have on already vulnerable people in our population. They fail to consider the long-term implications of their policies and fail to consider anyone but themselves and their mates. But we are now experiencing the impact of their policies on hardworking people and their families—people like nurses, teachers, firefighters, truck drivers and care workers. These are workers that kept our state and our nation going during the COVID pandemic. These were essential workers. And, really, these are workers that should be able to afford a roof over their heads.</para>
<para>That's why our package of reforms across housing and economic policies is the right thing to do. It's because we want to make sure that we protect our essential workers and protect the services that our country relies on. The Help to Buy scheme is one of the initiatives that I can wholeheartedly say will make a difference. Housing, along with cost-of-living pressures, is one of the issues that gets raised often with me in my regular catch-ups with community members. Whether by phone calls, meetings in coffee shops or town hall meetings, they are a really great way of keeping in touch with the community and understanding what their concerns are. My job is to relay those concerns to my colleagues in the government and make sure that we have meaningful action that has a coordinated response that helps people at the coalface.</para>
<para>Effort is being made to address these issues, and the Help to Buy scheme is a tangible initiative which is open to people who need it. This bill is an example of those efforts being transformed into real outcomes. This bill is also part of a wider range of reforms. The housing reform agenda of the Albanese government is an ambitious one, and I will say we are unapologetic about that. We've embraced this and we are taking responsibility. Our goal is to boost the supply of all housing stock. This will mean more public housing, more social housing, more affordable housing, more homes to rent and more homes to buy. The bill will contribute to the implementation of our ambitious agenda. We are taking action and making a difference with measures that can deliver a real, tangible outcome—not just words but action, not apathy but action. We're taking action to make sure that all Australians can live with security and dignity by working in partnership with state and territory governments, not against them.</para>
<para>It's amazing that we managed to get National Cabinet agreed to build 1.2 million homes by 2030. This is incredible. It makes sure that we have our eye on what we are trying to do in more than five years time to make sure that we actually have a decent amount of housing supply. Supply has been the key issue that has resulted in challenging housing affordability. It is through this collaboration that we are able to develop schemes that will help thousands of Australians. Owning your own home should not be just a dream. It should be a reality regardless of income. That's what this bill does. It will help 40,000 middle-income Australian households achieve their dream. Those who have been locked out of the housing market will be able to consider a future in their own home—secure safe and sustainable.</para>
<para>The reality for nearly 5,000 new homeowners since the government came into office is they've been able to get into home ownership when, for too long, it eluded them. That's thanks to Labor. This was elusive under the Liberals. Applications are currently open for the first round of the Housing Australia Future Fund and the accord. The $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund has started. It will support 30,000 new affordable rental homes over the first five years. It's another example of delivering on a commitment. It's the biggest investment for more than a decade, a decade when the housing needs of Australians were neglected. The future of housing is now back on track thanks to the work being established by the HAFF, and it will direct funding to support social and affordable rental housing. When it comes to the National Housing Accord, planning and zoning reforms will be supported, with an investment of $350 million in addition federal funding to deliver 10,000 affordable rental homes over five years from 2024, which will also be matched by states and territories. Partnerships putting people above politics means that all Australians benefit.</para>
<para>Under the Help to Buy initiative the Commonwealth will provide an equity contribution to eligible participants of 40 per cent for new homes and 30 per cent for existing homes. It's an integral part of our broader housing agenda. It's responsible, and it's recognised by experts as the correct path forward. Unlike the ideas put forward by the Greens, ideas that have been criticised by housing experts, our supply plan has received support. The Grattan Institute said that Labor's plan will put significant downward pressure on rents. This will save renters $32 billion over the next decade, but we in the Senate have heard that short-term thinking leads to long-term problems, and that's what the ideas of the Greens are—short term and knee jerk. We need long-term solutions that are sustainable.</para>
<para>I commend the plans that are before us today. The Help to Buy scheme is long term and effective. It is a sustainable solution. It provides a vehicle towards homeownership. Under Labor there's a pathway to own your own home. Under the Liberals there are just roadblocks. And I'll say it again: our challenges are serious, but we have serious solutions.</para>
<para>I think about one of the women that I with studying my Masters of Community Development with at Murdoch University. She's a single mum, she lives in social housing and she put herself through university, got her postgraduate qualifications and has a great job, but it will take a very long time for her to afford a home of her own. But the Help to Buy scheme will unlock the door, literally, to a home. She and her daughter can have a roof over their heads. That's what the Albanese Labor government does. We change the lives of individuals one step at a time, one door at a time. This is something that I'm very proud of.</para>
<para>After a decade of little action, we have had enormous action, and it's clear that the Albanese government is working hard to turn around the housing challenges in Australia today. I commend this bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SHARKIE</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
    <electorate>Mayo</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I won't stand in the way of any reasonable measure to assist Australians to be part of the great Australian dream of homeownership. However, I'm cautious that blind adherence to government incentives can exacerbate the very problems they seek to fix. The Help to Buy Bill 2023 proposes a national equity program that states and territories may opt in to help Australians to buy a home if they currently do not have the sufficient funds for a deposit.</para>
<para>On paper, this sounds like a reasonable and sensible approach to assist everyday Australians. It also sounds remarkably similar to government programs that already exist or have existed throughout the country. So I have some questions. If these programs are or were successful at the state and territory level, why do we need a federal program? If these programs were not successful, why does the government believe that they can implement the same program with a different result? And, lastly, will a federal program simply displace state and territory programs with no net effect?</para>
<para>We all want to see homeownership attainable for those who want it. Equity and fairness are cornerstones of our democracy, and we must do all we can to ensure that everyone has a fair go. However, I'm concerned that this bill and many of the policies of this government with respect to housing are failing to address the core problems of home ownership and the cost of living, which I'll discuss further shortly. Before I do that I wish to look at how governments in the past have dealt with this important issue.</para>
<para>Former prime minister Robert Menzies spoke of the aspiration of home ownership in his seminal speech on 'the forgotten people' in 1942. Since that speech, state and federal governments of both persuasions have made explicit policy objectives to achieve home ownership aspirations of Australians.</para>
<para>While government policy objectives have not changed over time, the mechanism to obtain these objectives has. Postwar policies were typically supply-side orientated—that is they promoted housing construction and also included the sale of public housing, which provided capital to build more public housing stock. In the 1980s, governments moved to demand-side policies with measures such as first home owner stamp duty concessions and grants and, more recently, shared equity programs.</para>
<para>It's very clear from the data that the demand-side policies have not worked. In the age cohorts of 25 to 34 and 35 to 44, home ownership rates have declined dramatically from their peaks in the early 1980s. Why did we then persist with policies that have failed?</para>
<para>The government will argue that this bill simply complements its many supply-side policies, like the National Housing Accord, the Housing Australia Future Fund and the National Housing Infrastructure Facility—to name a few. While this is true, these measures are unfortunately not keeping pace with other government policies that are adding pressure.</para>
<para>Home ownership is intrinsically linked to the total cost of the property, including taxes and transfer costs, availability of property, the deposit required and the ability of the prospective owner to service a loan. In this term of government we've had successive rate rises that have seen the repayments on a mortgage of $750,000 rise by around $2,000 per month, a staggering $24,000 of after-tax money per year that many Australian households need to find in order to service a loan. This has resulted in many Australians being priced out of the market because they can no longer meet the lending criteria</para>
<para>I've mentioned in this place previously that inflation—the driver of these mortgage rate rises—has been running hot because the government added $209 billion of new spending and has implemented a 'big Australia' policy that has seen record migration levels. Last year we recorded 737,200 overseas arrivals and 219,100 departures—a net migration of 518,100. This equates to more than 80 per cent of the population increase. The government controls migration and it is therefore on the government to explain why it has allowed so many to settle in Australia at a time when we already had immense housing pressures, and the natural demand of that flow-on from this is inflationary.</para>
<para>Last week the Housing Industry Association advised that new modelling showed we are already 200,000 homes behind the target set by the government in August last year. While 96,250 detached houses are expected in this financial year, it is down 12.6 per cent on the previous 12 months, and down by almost a third from the 2020-21 peak. Clearly the government's supply-side policies are not working to a level to keep up with that demand, which is overextended by mass migration policies.</para>
<para>As I mentioned at the outset, I will not stand in the way of this bill. I will support this bill because I want every Australian to be able to realise their dream of owning their own home. However, I'll make it very clear that I will withdraw my support for this bill if amendments are made that reflect the wishes of the Australian Greens, who seek to attack the mums and dads of this country who have worked hard to buy a second home. Any changes to negative gearing or capital gains tax would be a broken promise and one that I steadfastly object to.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COKER</name>
    <name.id>263547</name.id>
    <electorate>Corangamite</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>At local markets and street stalls, people often share their stories with me—stories about housing and rapid population growth, which is occurring right across my electorate of Corangamite in Victoria. The Albanese government understands that this rapid growth is putting pressure on housing availability and affordability, particularly in electorates like mine. Since coming to office in 2022, we have introduced a raft of measures to proactively address these challenges, and we are making significant progress. The latest measure is our Help to Buy scheme, which will cut the cost of buying a new home by up to 40 per cent with the help of the Commonwealth through Housing Australia. For existing homes, the bill will cut costs by 30 per cent. This will give buyers a much needed leg-up and also boost housing supply, with an incentive largely directed at the construction of new homes. Participants in this scheme will only require a two per cent deposit and will benefit from lower mortgage payments through smaller ongoing home loans.</para>
<para>Significantly, Help to Buy will support the purchase of up to 10,000 properties per year over four years. This will be tightly targeted, meaning it will help people who need it, without driving up property prices. This housing reform will be the first national shared-equity scheme of its kind, where the Commonwealth will play a vital role in helping people buy a home of their own. Put simply, this bill, the Help to Buy Bill 2023, is all about bringing down the cost barriers that prevent Australians from entering the housing market. It's about putting downward pressure on rental prices without impacting inflation. It's about addressing key challenges affecting young Australians, like Lily from my electorate in Corangamite. Lily rents in a share house in Torquay. She juggles two jobs, working 40 hours at a shop in Barwon Heads and, on weekends, running a baked goods business with her mum. Alongside that, she is studying at TAFE. Despite all the hard work and long hours, Lily told me she couldn't possibly see herself buying a home in the next ten years. She said: 'It's just not possible, no matter where I look. To put together a deposit at the moment is almost impossible.' When I told her about the Help to Buy scheme and what it will mean for young Australians like her, her whole disposition changed. She said: 'This is a game changer. Why couldn't this have come sooner?' I told her that this was a question for members of the opposition, the former government, who did little to tackle housing supply and affordability.</para>
<para>Now we see the coalition teaming up with the Greens to stand in the way of more help for homebuyers, despite the fact this bill will put downward pressure on rental prices. Help to Buy will provide a pathway to homeownership for people like Lily who have been locked out of the market. I urge the Greens and the coalition to please do the right thing, support this bill and help more renters be able to buy a home.</para>
<para>On this side of the House, we recognise Australia's housing challenges are serious, and our government is serious about addressing them. Our Minister for Housing and Minister for Small Business has been working hard to make this a reality, rolling out a suite of measures to revitalise our housing market after a decade of policy neglect. We know that in the last decade, under former coalition governments, it was so much harder for Australians. That is not what our communities deserve, and it's why this Labor government is acting. With the cost-of-living challenges facing Australians, this bill signals our government's commitment to ensuring people right across our nation have access to the dreams and ambitions of homeownership. This dream has been the pillar of our national identity for decades, from postwar reconstruction, when the Chifley Labor government delivered the world's first ever federal housing policy, to the housing policies of Whitlam, Hawke, Keating, Rudd and Gillard—Labor leaders who understood that owning your 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 shows like <inline font-style="italic">The Sullivans</inline> and <inline font-style="italic">Neighbours</inline><inline font-style="italic">,</inline> and who can forget the classic Australian drama, <inline font-style="italic">The Castle</inline>, which told our story, the story of the importance of homeownership and the Australian dream. But, over the last 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 them 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. That's why the Albanese government has introduced the bill in this House. We know that, because of the inaction of the former Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison governments, outright homeownership rates have dropped significantly. This inaction was fuelled by infighting and leadership squabbles which were aptly showcased in the<inline font-style="italic"> Nemesis </inline>program on the ABC. This bill, alongside our ambitious housing agenda, is all about changing that reality.</para>
<para>Just last year, we delivered on our commitment for the Regional First Home Buyer Guarantee three months early. That reform has already helped more than 13,000 people across Australia into homeownership. In 2024, we'll deliver more help for homebuyers and renters with significant tax cuts, family health boosts and rent assistance. This bill will ensure that Australians don't have to sacrifice their health, wellbeing and education and that they can put a roof over their head. It will work alongside our government's cheaper medicines policy, which is driving down prices at the pharmacy for more than 300 medicines which have now been added to the PBS. It will work alongside the cheaper child care subsidy, which has seen more than 30,000 families save up to $1,500 on childcare costs. It will work alongside our urgent care clinics, where you just need a Medicare card—not a credit card—to get the health care you need. It will work alongside our tax cuts for all Australians, putting more dollars back into the pockets of hardworking Australians. And, of course, it adds to our ambitious housing agenda, which includes the $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund building 30,000 new homes in its first five years, with 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.</para>
<para>There is 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 additional $1 billion in the National Housing Infrastructure Facility to support more homes and up to $575 million in funding already unlocked from the National Housing Infrastructure Facility, with homes under construction. We're increasing the maximum rate of Commonwealth rent assistance by 15 per cent—the largest increase in 30 years—and providing an extra $2 billion in financing for more social and affordable rental housing through Housing Australia.</para>
<para>It doesn't stop there. There are new incentives to boost rental housing by changing arrangements for investments in build-to-rent accommodation. There's 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. We're developing a new National Housing and Homelessness Plan and a better deal for renters, which the states and territories have agreed to implement through this suite of measures and the bill I stand to support today. We're making a real difference for so many Australians looking to buy a home of their own. These reforms are about strengthening our housing market for local communities, local families and all people who want a roof over their head. They're about unlocking the door to homeownership for all Australians. Our government understands that, with national leadership, with cooperation with states, local government and industry and with the right housing policies, we can continue to make a real difference. I urge the Greens and the coalition to support this bill. Support hardworking Australians like Lily, and do the right thing. I commend this bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PIKE</name>
    <name.id>300120</name.id>
    <electorate>Bowman</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>There's been a lot of discussion in the debate this afternoon and this morning on the housing crisis that many communities across parliament experience. In fact, probably every parliamentarian here represents a community that's facing a housing crisis. It's not just a crisis of affordability for people seeking to purchase a property and enter the property market as owners. It's a crisis being felt by people across the housing continuum. Many people in my electorate are unable to find a rental property. There are people who are unable to find social housing, and, of course, there are many Redlanders within my electorate who are unable to find a place to purchase and enter the market. It's one of the more challenging things that any level of government has to deal with, and in the Australian context it's an incredibly complex area of policy because the responsibilities cascade through all levels of government. This housing scheme, unfortunately, will not offer homeownership but rather home co-ownership with the government. It will not make a dent on the current housing crisis that's gripping the nation. Unfortunately, through this bill and through the lack of details that have been provided by the government, we simply haven't got the details to be able to answer many of the questions that are still left unanswered in relation to this scheme. For Australians—and there are many of these Australians within my electorate—who are desperate to buy their first home, all this bill offers is the prospect of co-ownership of a home with the federal government. That's not exactly the Australian dream.</para>
<para>Labor have paraded this scheme as a solution to the housing affordability crisis, but it will very much be a niche scheme, with a very small impact—certainly for the people within my electorate who are currently seeking to find a rental. I was at a rental inspection for a relative of mine. I joined her to check on a rental property within my electorate. The line-up for a two-bedroom townhouse was something to behold; it went down the block. There were families of four and six lined up desperately trying to get a roof over their head. This scheme, unfortunately, does very little to support them or support those who have broader ambitions in terms of ownership. It is very much a niche program. It's only available to a small pool; we're still not clear on what the parameters will be around the eligibility of that pool. With so many Australians feeling the bite of the cost-of-living crisis—which, unfortunately, this government has presided over, making the crisis far worse than it needs to be—this niche program, costing $5.5 billion, won't be a solution.</para>
<para>At the moment, the only housing policies which are supporting first home buyers are the policies that were implemented by the previous coalition government that the current government have been able to inherit. The coalition remains committed to making homeownership a reality for Australians. We want to make sure that Australians can own their own homes sooner. Our record in government reflects that, and the policies we intend to bring to the next election will demonstrate that as well. Unfortunately, what we are seeing from the current government are a lot of shiny brochures when it comes to housing policy but not much in terms of real content. This Help to Buy is certainly a niche program that fails to address any real need in the housing market.</para>
<para>Of course, the main crisis is not an affordability crisis per se; it's a crisis of supply. I fear that policies like this, which pump a certain element of demand, are not the true solution to housing supply in this country. Within my electorate you'd be lucky to be able to build any home under this scheme because you simply cannot find a lot of land to do so. There is increasing demand across all of South-East Queensland. Unfortunately, this is not going to touch the sides in terms of ensuring that we can get that supply up to the level that is required to meet growing demand. Increased migration levels—which was a topic of discussion in question time today—means that we are going to need more homes to house Australians and new Australians. We need to ensure that supply keeps up with demand.</para>
<para>Just this week, we've seen the Housing Industry Association confirm that Labor will fall at least 200,000 homes short of its 1.2 million home target. With 20,000 homes per month required to meet the 1.2 million home target and with the current monthly building data averaging at 13,000 per month, Labor will be lucky to even get 800,000 homes. So it seems to be gearing up that the ambition was 1.2 million; we're not going to get to 800,000—or we might just get to 800,000. This is, of course, far less than what was delivered during the previous government. This is 200,000 fewer homes than what was delivered during the last five full calendar years of the coalition government. Between 2017 and 2021 we saw an amazing 1,029,043 homes built across Australia. You've got to remember that was during a significant period of the pandemic response when building homes became incredibly challenging due to the restrictions.</para>
<para>Over the period when the government wants to build 1.2 million homes, the National Housing Finance and Investment Corporation expects that 1.7 million new households will actually be formed. While the ambition is to achieve 1.2 million homes, the actual demand will be 1.7 million. So even under the ambitious target, we aren't going to get anywhere close to what's required to ensure that supply meets demand. The Labor government's goals are unambitious and dangerously so. They're not going to come anywhere near meeting these unambitious goals. Even if we meet those goals—and we know from the latest data that I've just outlined that it's now impossible—housing in Australia will be significantly less affordable at the end of this decade than it is today. With 1.5 million people expected to come to this country over the next five years, the equation is just going to go further out.</para>
<para>Under this government, rents have increased by 26 per cent. First home buyers and new home approvals remain at their lowest levels in more than a decade. Lending for new homes remains at a shameful 20-year low, and we've recently seen the weakest quarter of construction in more than a decade. Despite all of this, we're seeing this government continue to implement its big migration plans. When the market needs more homes, Labor instead is championing this Help to Buy scheme that does nothing to stop these shortages. In fact, it purely drives further demand.</para>
<para>Let's touch for a moment on some of the failures we've already seen with this scheme. It hasn't even been implemented yet, but of course it's well behind schedule. We're only debating this bill now in 2024, but the Help to Buy scheme was an election policy of the Labor government and it was meant to begin on 1 January 2023. We're already well past 1 January 2024, and this scheme won't see the light of day until well into this year at the earliest. At best, it's already 18 months late. It's not only late but it's also not well thought through. Labor's Help to Buy plan lacks the details of serious legislation. We still have no detail regarding the eligibility criteria. Importantly we don't have information on the obligations for those who are part of the scheme and whose financial circumstances change and place them outside of the scheme's parameters. That's a really important concept that we need to get the bottom of. What happens if you start engaging in this process as an eligible purchaser and then, over the course of the next 20 or 30 years—the life of the mortgage—you receive promotions, get a new job or come into some inherited income and find yourself outside the scheme's parameters? We need to understand the details of that.</para>
<para>We need to have details on which lenders will participate, how participants may be able to exit the scheme, how they may be able to buy the government out of their share and what the property price caps are. Will this be available for every single home in Australia, or will it be a target band? We don't have that level of detail yet. With so much unknown and uncertain about this proposal, the government are asking first home buyers to enter into this scheme and take a significant risk. The scheme also puts the Commonwealth at a financial risk if defaults on mortgages occur, due the removal of the need for lenders mortgage insurance. It's risky for homebuyers, it's risky for government and it's too risky for the coalition to support.</para>
<para>We've got serious concerns about the shared-equity model. The Help to Buy scheme is simply not going to work. Shared-equity schemes are not the solution to help Australians into their own homes. These schemes where the government co-owns the home of the participants can contribute to growth in house prices across the board. We've had comments in the press from Cameron Kusher, who's the Director of Economic Research at REA Group. The quote is:</para>
<quote><para class="block">If the government has a stake in the property, it has more of an incentive for prices to increase.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Potentially it could be inflationary …</para></quote>
<para>These shared equity schemes also encourage Australians to take undue financial risk in a scheme that doesn't even answer all their financial questions. What happens if you need to undertake renovations or some serious upgrades to the property? I recently installed security cameras at my property, and I think it's an important investment that we've got to make, unfortunately, under the current youth crime crisis that's gripping a lot of South East Queensland. The question is: if I had to do that and the government owned half the property, would I be able to send half the invoice for that investment to the Prime Minister? Would I be able to get the government to pay for half of a driveway repair or a gutter repair? These are questions that are completely unclear at this point, but I think the answer would be, no, you'd be up to foot the bill for all the investment that you make in the property.</para>
<para>What happens if your wages increase and you earn a dollar more than the eligibility criteria—an important unanswered question. What happens if housing prices fall? That's an important question. Of course, we've had record growth in houses across Australia for many years, but it's not always a straight trajectory. What happens if house prices go down? What happens if financial circumstances of the participants within this scheme change?</para>
<para>Labor promised before the previous election that they would cut the cost of buying a home by 40 per cent for those who are part of the scheme. With a promise such as this, surely many Australians would want to be involved, yet the government has let them down through delays and a lack of detail. We've seen at the state level that these schemes don't work. The are so unwanted by Australians that places remain unfilled in the New South Wales Shared Equity Homebuyer Helper scheme, in Victoria's Homebuyer Fund, in South Australia's HomeStart Shared Equity Option and in Tasmania's MyHome shared equity program. Australians simply don't want to participate in these programs. Australians are voting with her feet and not taking part in these schemes because, unlike this government, they are making smart financial decisions for their futures. Aussies are saying no to shared equity because they don't want to give the Prime Minister and his housing minister a seat at their kitchen table. They want to make their own decisions about their own futures, not hand in hand with the government. That's what this government is trying to do. They're trying to force a niche option on Australians. Australians don't like the idea of sharing their mortgage with the housing minister; they want the Australian dream, not to be locked into the Australian nightmare. Many Australians need support and the housing market, but Aussies know that shared equity schemes are certainly not the way forward.</para>
<para>I want to reflect on the coalition's record on housing when compared to this rather weak option. Housing policies of the previous coalition government have supported more than 300,000 Australians with the purchase of their home in the last three years. The Coalition's home guarantee schemes have supported 60,000 first home buyers and single-parent families to own their own homes. One in three first home buyers are supported by the policies that were promoted by the previous coalition government. The coalition also helped 27,600 first home buyers accelerate their savings for their deposit towards homeownership through the First Home Super Saver Scheme. Those supported by the coalition programs do not co-own their homes with the government. The government programs help them achieve the dream of home ownership. I think there's a significant difference between what had previously been the housing policies of the federal government and what the policies now look like and the policy proposals that are being put forward by the current government.</para>
<para>In most of the country, we're in the midst of an ongoing housing affordability and rental crisis, and the government is offering this scheme as a solution to the housing market problems. The assumption is that there is a market failure in home building, but the failure doesn't sit with the market; it sits with the government. Home construction is not a declining industry. The Australian economy knows well how to produce new homes. We've led the world in this area and we need to have more policies that encourage supply, not just pump demand.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr GARLAND</name>
    <name.id>295588</name.id>
    <electorate>Chisholm</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's my pleasure to rise in support of this important bill and genuine policy reform. In May 2022 Labor took the Help to Buy policy to our communities as one of our key election commitments. The Help to Buy Bill 2023 and Help to Buy (Consequential Provisions) Bill 2023 give effect to this commitment and provide for Housing Australia to administer the Help to Buy scheme, supported by a referral of power from the states.</para>
<para>Our Labor government is an ambitious government committed to a housing agenda that will improve housing affordability and supply. We've already created the $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund—the single biggest investment to support social and affordable housing in more than a decade. We've also provided $2 billion to state and territory governments to deliver around 4,000 new social homes. Our government has also unlocked $575 million from the National Housing Infrastructure Facility, with homes being built right around the country, and we will invest an additional $1 billion in this facility to support even more homes.</para>
<para>We are a government that has delivered the largest increase in Commonwealth rent assistance in 30 years. This is real practical assistance for Australians that makes a difference. Our government wants to ensure that more Australians have a roof over their heads through a new national housing and homelessness plan. I'm proud that our government does not just talk when it comes to Australians having a roof over their heads; we act and we will always act. Through this legislation, our government is taking yet another step forward.</para>
<para>Our government understands that buying a home is important to Australians. We know what a difference this will make. Homeownership is an opportunity for Australians to put down roots and to live and to build life in community. It allows for children to join the local sports club and for parents to get involved with the local primary school with a sense of stability and ownership—not just of their home, but with further equity in their communities.</para>
<para>Delivering on our commitment to initiate the Help to Buy scheme will mean more Australians have a safe and affordable place to call home and build community. This is, of course, alongside all of our other housing commitments meaning that we can help more people. We'll continue to be ambitious for Australians. It's what drives me; it's what drives our government every single day. Our ambitious housing reform agenda is working right across Australia. We're providing more help for homebuyers, for renters and for people who need a safe place for the night.</para>
<para>Our government's working hard every day to help Australians facing housing challenges, and, through this important piece of legislation, we're doing even more. The Help to Buy shared-equity scheme will support up 40,000 Australian households to purchase a home of their own. Under the scheme, the Commonwealth will provide an equity contribution to eligible participants of up to 40 per cent of the purchase price for new homes and 30 per cent for existing homes.</para>
<para>On a practical level, states will be required to pass legislation for the scheme to operate in their jurisdictions. Significantly, in August all states agreed at National Cabinet to progress legislation, so this scheme will run nationally. This scheme will be open to applications for four years with 10,000 places available each year.</para>
<para>At a functional level, the Help to Buy scheme will be delivered by Housing Australia and supported by a panel of lenders. This will fulfil our government's election commitment to establish a national shared-equity scheme.</para>
<para>From a timing perspective, it is expected that states and territories will pass legislation in 2024, so this year. Consistent with general practice for referrals of power, at least one state must pass legislation before the Commonwealth passes the Help to Buy legislation.</para>
<para>This legislation is another important step forward that our government is taking to bring homeownership back into the reach of more Australians. In November of last year, the Minister for Housing introduced legislation to make Help to Buy a reality. This is not just a leg-up to help Australians into homeownership but it also provides long-term relief for participants in the scheme, and we know that this will be the first national shared-equity scheme of its kind. This will be delivered through Housing Australia and will assist Australians to overcome the hurdle of both saving for a deposit and servicing a mortgage, which are challenges that people face.</para>
<para>Through Help to Buy, the Commonwealth will cut the cost of buying a home by up to 40 per cent. Participants will only require a minimum two per cent deposit and will benefit from lower ongoing mortgage repayments through a smaller home loan. As mentioned, when National Cabinet met in August last year they agreed to progress this legislation so that the scheme can run nationally. And we've seen recent recommitments to this agreement.</para>
<para>We're now acting, with the introduction of this legislation, to help ensure the government is in the best position to make this support available to Australians. We'll continue to work closely with state and territory governments on the rollout of the scheme. We know that eligible participants will be able to access the scheme through participating lenders, alongside a standard mortgage.</para>
<para>As with a traditional mortgage, Housing Australia will then provide the Commonwealth's equity contribution through a loan arrangement secured against the property. A special appropriation to enter Help to Buy arrangements through Housing Australia will be funded by the Commonwealth and will provide a return to the Commonwealth when the equity is repaid. The Minister for Housing will provide written directions to Housing Australia on the operation of the scheme, including decision-making criteria for entering Help to Buy arrangements. This is a similar approach to other government programs, like the Home Guarantee Scheme.</para>
<para>The bill also includes the administrative framework for Help to Buy, including that Housing Australia must report to the minister on an annual basis. It also provides that the minister must cause a review of Help to Buy as soon as possible after the end of three years from the commencement of the bill. There's also a general power to make regulations that are required or permitted by the bill, or are necessary or convenient to give effect to the bill. A significant attribute of Help to Buy is that it will be open to assist people who've owned homes before and those who are yet to purchase their first home. Importantly, this bill seeks to capture people at almost all stages of life. It'll help singles, couples, siblings, those starting in the workforce, as well as those who are close to retirement and everywhere in between.</para>
<para>We are an ambitious government. We are committed to a housing agenda that will improve housing affordability and supply, and we take this responsibility really seriously. We're sharing in the cost of purchasing a home, and, upon sale, any capital gains or losses will be shared between the participant and the government, proportionate to their interests. Whilst the Commonwealth recognises that most states and territories already administer some form of shared-equity scheme, with most made available only to specific cohorts, there is an opportunity that we see for the Commonwealth to complement these existing schemes and to extend this support to more Australian households by establishing our national shared-equity scheme.</para>
<para>Whilst households will be limited to accessing one shared-equity scheme at a time, whether it is Help to Buy or it's a state or territory scheme, they will have the opportunity to apply for the scheme that best suits their personal circumstances. Places will be allocated between participating states and territories on a per capita basis. Each state and territory's allocation will be available to eligible residents on a first come, first serve basis. The 10,000 places will be available under the Help to Buy scheme each year and will be initially allocated to participating states and territories on a per capita basis. States will need to have passed the Help to Buy legislation in order to access scheme places. The territories are not required to pass legislation for the scheme to operate in their jurisdictions.</para>
<para>Help to Buy will support the purchase and construction of new and existing homes, including houses, townhouses and apartments—all sorts of housing. Up to a 40 per cent equity contribution will be available to support eligible new homes, including house and land packages, land and separate contract-to-build homes, and off-the-plan dwellings. Help to Buy will involve the government directly contributing funds to support an eligible applicant's home purchase. That means that participants can buy a home with a smaller deposit, smaller mortgage and smaller mortgage repayments.</para>
<para>Fundamentally, this scheme is aimed at supporting low- to middle-income households into homeownership. Income caps will apply in the form of $90,000 for singles and $120,000 for joint applicants, which compares with the Home Guarantee Scheme's caps of $125,000 for singles and $200,000 for joint applicants. Participants will be able to renovate their homes, and they will not have to seek the government's permission to do so. That is a response of sorts to the previous contributor's queries about this scheme. So I hope that he goes back and looks at this publicly available information.</para>
<para>The government will not be a co-owner of scheme properties. Rather, the government's investment in participants' homes will be secured through a second mortgage, with the government's interest similar in nature to a private mortgage holder. In relation to participants exceeding the income cap, after entering the scheme the participant's individual circumstances will be considered, with participants only needing to repay the Commonwealth's contribution as their circumstances permit.</para>
<para>Of note is that continuity arrangements have been provisioned within the bill in the unfortunate situation that a participant passes away. That will allow a participant's beneficiary, subject to eligibility, to participate in the scheme. Participants or their executors may make repayments of the equity contribution. Participants will be able to make early payments on the government's equity share when they are able to do so and thereby increase their stake in the property. At a minimum, this must be five per cent for the value of the property at the time of repayments. Participants will not pay rent or interest on the government's equity share.</para>
<para>This is ambitious reform, and we are ambitious for all Australians. Of course, we can contrast that with the approach to housing from those opposite, who, during the last election campaign, relentlessly attacked our government's commitment here and who of course did next to nothing over the previous decade. They had the privilege, the gift, of government and failed to build the homes that Australians need. We know that those opposite like to say no to everything, but I do really urge them to very seriously consider supporting legislation that ensures that more Australians are able to enter homeownership.</para>
<para>We understand that affordable housing is critical to economic wellbeing and to building communities, and we are absolutely committed to supporting more Australians in their endeavour to build community and to access housing. We are getting on with the business of good government—doing what we said we would do—and we'll continue to be unapologetically ambitious for Australians, including in the area of housing.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KATTER</name>
    <name.id>HX4</name.id>
    <electorate>Kennedy</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My family, my forebears, have lived in Charters Towers since the 1880s, or something like. When I moved there from my home town of Cloncurry, we didn't have enough money to finish our house. I had put a lot of money into buying cattle and developing a copper mine which we were producing copper from. My wife went in—we had 20 acres—and she said we had to subdivide it because we couldn't afford to finish building the house. All land in the greater Charters Towers area was under control of the mines department, and you went to see the mining clerk of the court, a gentleman called Michael Power, if you wanted a subdivision. He said yes, or he said no, and that was as simple as it was.</para>
<para>My wife said, 'Can we subdivide it?' He said, 'Have you got the survey done?' She said yes and handed him the survey plan. He said, 'Fill out that form, Suze.' So my wife filled it out. 'Give me 25 bucks. Thank you.' She said, 'When can I sell it?' He said, 'You can sell it now.' 'Right now?' 'Yes, go down to the real estate agent and sell it. Once I've stamped it and signed it, it's finished.'</para>
<para>Now, if we wanted to do that today—because the socialist ALP government, when they overthrew the much-maligned Bjelke-Petersen government, abolished the mining act—we'd have to go through the process like every other poor beggar in Queensland. You've got to put in an application to the local traditional owners, and that takes a long time and a lot of money to get over that hurdle. Then you've got to have a soil-testing and engineering report done on the house and the effect on an engineering basis. Then you have to get another report on the environmental impact of the proposal, and then you've got to get a social impact statement. All of these things take about three to 4½ years. So once it took five minutes and now it takes four years.</para>
<para>No less a person in this place than the Treasurer in his first budget speech said, 'The problem confronting this nation is affordability. That is being driven by housing prices, which are being pressured by restrictive impositions upon land.' Myself and my two colleagues here said, 'Hear, hear.' For each of his five propositions, we said, 'Hear, hear. Spot on.' And then he said, 'We're setting up an authority.' We said, 'No, no!' We've already got four processes we've got to go through, and we'll have five processes we've got to go through if that authority is brought into operation.</para>
<para>The culpability of the people in the state parliaments—not so much this parliament—is colossal. They have driven average housing prices in Brisbane up to over $820,000 and in Sydney to over $1.2 million. These are the highest housing costs anywhere in the world. I don't know whether I've got it, but I'll have a quick look. I carry around a map I call 'the golden Australia'. I hold it up and I say, 'What's that?' They say, 'It's a map of Australia.' And I say, 'No, it's not. It's a map of Australia shorn of a little narrow hundred-kilometre coastal belt.' We've dropped off Victoria, but who'd miss Victoria? And there's a little dot around Perth.</para>
<para>Ninety-two per cent of the surface area of Australia is occupied by a meagre 1.2 million people. That's all that lives there, and they are leaving. In fact, west of the Great Dividing Range in Queensland we can only have one member of parliament now. There are only about 150,000 to 170,000 people left there, and it's not much better in New South Wales. The population is leaving.</para>
<para>Two hundred and forty years ago we Australians said, 'We don't need a population. We've got very strong birth control operating. We want to keep population down. We don't want to put too much pressure on the environment, so we want to keep population down and we don't have to have population.'</para>
<para>What happened to us? We were nearly annihilated. If it wasn't for the much maligned Christian missionaries in North Queensland—I can't speak for other parts of Australia—I think my people, my brother cousins, would have been annihilated. They pull them back into areas and made them no-go areas for whitefellas and protected the people. If it wasn't for that, I think there would have been a terrible result and it would have been annihilation or pretty close to it. That was the result of us sitting on our hands as Australians and saying, 'We don't need population. We don't need to populate this country. We could just go on the way we're going on, and it'll all be wonderful.'</para>
<para>This country has only three sources of income now. They're iron ore, coal and gas. That's it. They're worth $120 billion. The next thing down, which might be beef, is about $12 billion or something like that. Gold is maybe $12 billion and aluminium might be about $12 billion, but the big three are iron ore, coal and gas.</para>
<para>Gas is gone because people in this place sold it for six cents a unit. And God bless my union, the CFMEU, for saying again and again, 'You morons in this place sold all the gas for 6 cents a unit, and Australians have to buy their own gas back at $16 a unit.' Qatar—little tiny Qatar—exports the same amount of gas as Australia. They get $29,000 million dollars a year for it. We get $600 million. Those figures are old—they're about 20 years old—so you can multiply those figures by about three or four. We gave it away.</para>
<para>Coal—62 per cent of this country. Almost every single person in this parliament wants coal abolished. You're on record as wanting coal abolished. So what have you got for an income? You've got iron ore. You're just a quarry; you're not a mining country. Mining is when you dig it out of the earth and you sell metals. We don't dig it out of the ground and sell metals; we dig it out of the ground and sell the ground. That's called quarrying. We can't even process a metal in this country.</para>
<para>Returning to the subject of land, Australians are almost certainly a vanishing race. When the statistics for this year come out—when 20 Australians die they'll be replaced by 16 people. I love the zero-population-growth mob, all the wokies and the people that denigrate women for having children. They should all be career women, careering off into oblivion, extinction. As a race of people, at 100 miles an hour, we're becoming extinct. That's the price you pay for criminal stupidity. When you get old, as they have in China, there's no-one to look after you. It's going to be tough. I won't be around, but a lot of people in this place will be, when there's no-one to look after them in their old age. We're a dying race. Why are we a dying race? <inline font-style="italic">Cleo</inline> magazine did a wonderful series of articles on this: why do women in Australia not have children? They all want to have children, but they say, 'We're just waiting around until we've got enough money to get a house and settle down, find a more stable relationship.' But it doesn't happen and they run out of time. The biological clock runs out. We're a dying race.</para>
<para>In that golden Australia is all of your gold, all of your iron ore, all of your aluminium—no, bauxite, because we don't export aluminium anymore; we export bauxite. Fancy letting them export bauxite! When they went to Leo Hielscher, in the much maligned Queensland government, and said they wanted an export licence for bauxite, he burst out laughing. The idea that anyone was going to send bauxite overseas was laughable: 'We don't export bauxite; we export aluminium.' They said, 'We can't afford your high electricity charges.' Well, we're taking the coal for free, so there's no coal charge. We built the biggest power station in the world, so labour costs are negligible. All we've got to do is pay off the power station, which will pay itself off in about four or five years, so we'll have the cheapest electricity in the world. So, alright, we got an aluminium industry.</para>
<para>Going back to golden Australia, almost every single item this country exports comes out of golden Australia, where no-one is living, and those that are living there are leaving at 100 miles an hour. In inland North Queensland, Mount Isa, at 31,000 people, is now down to 19,000, and the mining company Xstrata—a foreign corporation—just decides to close its huge copper mine. They're a trading company. If you take copper off the market, the price of copper goes up, and this is a very big mine. Whether they did it for that purpose or whether they're just callous or incompetent, 2,000 Australians were sacked, and a Labor government did absolutely nothing. The 'use it or lose it' clause of the great Theodore—they were Labor governments, but they were labour governments, not what you've got now: ALP governments. They put in 'use it or lose it'. The great Bjelke-Petersen governments followed them. They were much the same people—half the Labor Party went over and joined the Country Party, so it was the same people. Rudd's family and my family fall into that category, by the way. Use it or lose it. These people have got it, but they don't have to use it; they can just sit on it. It's our resource, and they can just sit on it, trade it and make themselves wealthy while we, the people of Australia, get nothing out of it at all.</para>
<para>I hope that the two major parties are saying their prayers, because there's every likelihood that our party will get the balance of power in the forthcoming election. If you're Glencore, say your prayers because you're going to get what you justly deserve. You're a big, ruthless, international mining company and you treat the people like dirt. You can get away with it because the ALP allows you to and you can get away with it because the Liberal and National parties allow you to. But, I tell you what, you won't get away with it if the people's party is back in power. It'll be a different outcome, I can assure you.</para>
<para>Going back to the issue of housing, the cost of a house, for land, was $7,000 in Charters Towers. When the mines department was abolished, it went—hear me—from $7,000 to $142,000. That's what you did with all your regulatory impositions. You put that price on the poor young people trying to have kids, trying to propagate Australia. You put a burden on them of $142,000. Now, alright, it's come back to $82,000. There are a number of towns within 100 kilometres of a population centre of 300,000. It's not as if we're living in the middle of nowhere. We can give you a house and land package for $300,000, because, really, there's no justification for land costing any more than $20,000. If you're trying to get a block of land in Brisbane under $300,000, I wish you well.</para>
<para>Come and live in Charters Towers, Ingham or Ayr and you can get a block of land if the government plays ball and the authority allows us to go back to square one, where there's one person living in the town, working for the local council presumably, who decides whether you get the subdivision or you don't. Buyer beware. The block we sold had no water, no electricity and no sewerage on it. They bought it. They got the water connected. There was no necessity for a bitumen road, but eventually we did get a bitumen road. We didn't ask for it. The point of the story is that we could produce land for housing in any of those three towns within an hour of Townsville for under— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JOSH WILSON</name>
    <name.id>265970</name.id>
    <electorate>Fremantle</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I am very glad to speak on the Help to Buy Bill 2023, which establishes one of the key measures being put in place by the Albanese Labor government to address the sharp challenges in housing access and affordability in Australia. It's a big problem. We understand that. We're not turning away from it. We are taking it on, and, in the first 18 months of this government, we've put in place a significant package of measures to address what was neglected for the previous decade: access to safe and affordable housing. This is one of those measures, the Help to Buy bill, and we're putting it in place along with all the other measures, some of which I'll touch on in a bit, because we know that safe, secure and affordable housing is literally the foundation upon which our wellbeing depends.</para>
<para>As I've said before, the starkest measures of deprivation anywhere in the world, including in Australia, relate to the absence of safe and secure housing, which means the inability to live and sleep warmly and in peace. It means the lack of a place where you can prepare food and eat properly. It means the lack of a home base from which people can go to work and children can go off to school, and a home base to which people can return to and rest and be supported in the company of their family and housemates. Without safe and affordable housing, everything else in life is contingent and at risk: health, education, employment and social inclusion, and the opportunity to breathe out, to think about the future, to play, to love and to be loved. That's why safe and affordable housing is rightly considered a basic human right.</para>
<para>As I say, it is literally the steady ground under your feet; it is literally the roof over your head. That's why it's been a high priority and major focus for the Albanese government in our first term. It's why it was such a big part of our first full budget in May last year. And it needed to be, because, as I said, as in so many areas of Australian life, the Albanese federal Labor government are stepping back into an area that was woefully neglected for the nine years, the three terms, of government before us. It was a decade in many cases of nothing and in some cases of worse than nothing—not just neglect but the active undermining of the capacity for Australians to access safe and affordable housing.</para>
<para>In that cause, we are delivering the Help to Buy scheme. It's part of a wider package but an important measure in itself. The concept is very simple: the Albanese government, in partnership with state and territory governments, is going to assist low-income Australians to own a home by sharing the investment in that home with them. We know that there are significant barriers to homeownership, especially for younger and low-income Australians. We know that saving a deposit is hard when there are so many other cost pressures. We know that getting a loan is not easy. This scheme will assist by allowing government to take a share in the purchase of a home, thereby alleviating what is otherwise an obstacle that many Australians can't overcome.</para>
<para>The fact is that Western Australians don't need any convincing and probably don't need much explanation about the benefits and the value of shared-equity schemes because we've seen an approach of that kind in WA. We've seen how it assists people into housing and boosts homeownership, particularly for people who find that challenging. We've had the Keystart shared-equity program operating in WA since it was created by the Dowding Western Australian Labor government back in 1989. That's significant for me. I actually remember that—1989 was my last year of high school. My life up to that point involved relative insecurity of housing. I was talking to my brother and sister the other day, just reflecting on the fact that in my last four years of high school—I attended Swanbourne high school—we moved five times. We lived in five different houses in those four years. After my parents parted ways when I was young, my parents never owned a house again until after my father's parents died and he was able to purchase a home. My mum doesn't own a house to this day. We were a renting, single-parent household. That's just how it was in Fremantle at the time. It was a considerably more affordable place than it is now. It amazes me, in terms of the difference that my kids have experienced, to reflect on what that was like, to think that I lived in five different premises just over the last four years of high school.</para>
<para>Keystart has been a remarkable program in WA. As I say, it started in 1989. It's helped more than 120,000 Western Australians get into their own home through nearly 80,000 separate home loans over that period, accounting for $18.3 billion in total loan funding. Three-quarters of those loans went to people who were previously renting. So 75 per cent of people who benefited from a Keystart loan had been renting. Some of the other quarter probably weren't even renting in as much as they were probably still living with family or in some other kind of informal housing arrangement. Seventy-three per cent of the loans under the Keystart program, in the 35 years that it's been in operation, have been made to people between the ages of 20 and 40. So you can see that nearly three-quarters of those loans go to people in that younger age bracket, where we know people face those kinds of challenges.</para>
<para>There's just no doubt that shared-equity programs work. I'm going to quote something that Jessica Shaw, the Western Australian state Labor member for Swan Hills, said about Keystart because it can't really be said better:</para>
<quote><para class="block">In Keystart, the State has a commercially sustainable, low-deposit but not high-risk, lending business that sets people on the path to financial sustainability.</para></quote>
<para>That's absolutely right. So it's fantastic that the Albanese Labor government is now creating, through this bill, a similar shared-equity opportunity in Help to Buy that—certainly, in my state—will amplify what's already been delivered through Keystart. As I've said, it's an important measure. It's far from being the only thing that we've done in the first 18 months of this government. We created the $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund, with some significant resistance from other parts of the parliament, unfortunately—both the coalition and the Greens as it turned out, strangely enough. That's $10 billion through the Housing Australia Future Fund. It will create 40,000 dwellings over five years, with 4,000 of those dedicated to supporting women and children fleeing domestic violence. I don't think anyone would argue that we don't need that kind of measure.</para>
<para>The Social Housing Accelerator is $2 billion to partner with states and territories in creating new or refurbished social housing dwellings. The Home Guarantee Scheme was stood up quickly. It's already helped more than 67,000 people into homeownership since we were elected in May 2022. That includes 9,000 in rural and regional Australia through the Regional First Home Buyer Guarantee. As part of our focus on cost of living, which was the highest priority focus of our first full budget, we delivered the largest increase to Commonwealth rent assistance that had been provided in 30 years. So we know that housing is a significant cost pressure. As I said, it's really the principal cost pressure on any Australian household. We are doing a number of things that are specific to housing but also things that go to cost of living more broadly, noting that that makes a difference when it comes to people's capacity to afford safe and secure housing.</para>
<para>That assistance to Commonwealth rent assistance, as we discussed, was a bill about getting people into homeownership. We of course know that people who aren't in a position to buy at this stage are essentially facing the rental market, and the market is tough. That's why we're working with the states on the rules that help regulate rental tenancies so that people can receive fair treatment, can ensure that they're not facing unconscionable rent increases that pile up one after the other, can face other kinds of sharp dealing when it comes to trying to find a place to rent on a fair basis. To the extent that the Commonwealth can make a direct difference to the capacity of people to afford rental premises, we are providing, as I said, the largest increase to Commonwealth rent assistance in 30 years.</para>
<para>We also boosted the National Housing Infrastructure Facility, and that's significant because, last year, when the cabinet came to Western Australia, as the Prime Minister committed to doing, making sure that cabinet and key ministers spend time in WA following his commitment to be in the west as often as he can be, there was an announcement by the Prime Minister and the minister for housing, with their Western Australian counterparts, of an $88 million investment through the National Housing Infrastructure Facility for a new social and affordable housing project in central Perth. It's being undertaken in cooperation with the Cook WA Labor government. They are putting in about $45 million. It will create 200 new dwellings, including 66 social housing apartments and 44 affordable rental homes.</para>
<para>As we make the change, which I hope is supported across the board, it's worth remembering the scale of the challenge not just in the way that it is experienced by people who are struggling to buy or to rent. The scale of the challenge before us is partly created by relatively short medium-term circumstances, but the greatest contributor to it is the longer-term pattern of neglect.</para>
<para>I said before that you could look at the things that the coalition did and didn't do. You can call it neglect. You can say that it's a failure of omission inasmuch as a lot of the measures that the Rudd and Gillard governments put in place—Prime Minister Rudd had his own experience of housing insecurity and was therefore very committed to introducing a range of programs at the Commonwealth level that would address that. It wasn't just that the incoming Abbott government said: 'We'll take our hands off the wheel. There's nothing more to do here.' There was a series of steps that the former government took that made things worse. They got rid of the housing help for seniors pilot. Older Australians, who are least able to increase their income and, frankly, need safe and secure housing as much as anyone, benefited from the housing help for seniors pilot. That got the chop under the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison government.</para>
<para>They tried to cut funding to community legal centres. Mercifully, that was resisted. Think about the work that community legal centres do in terms of tenancy support and advice. Think about how critical it is when people who are possibly facing eviction and finding themselves homeless are able to get that expert legal assistance and advice. The coalition government wanted to cut the knees out from under community legal centres, which certainly would have not just had acute, harmful impacts on individuals but also pushed greater costs onto every part of the system. We know that, when you don't prevent a person from being in crisis, the consequences after that, when they've been evicted, end up being much more costly than if they could have stayed in their home in the first place. The coalition government wasn't finished there. They defunded the homelessness and community housing peak bodies. They thought: 'We don't need peak bodies who are in the game of helping give advice on policy, of helping to represent some of the most marginalised and disadvantaged Australians. We will stop supporting the vital work that they do.'</para>
<para>They closed the National Rental Affordability Scheme, a key policy under the Rudd-Gillard government, and they abolished the National Housing Supply Council. The one thing that those opposite will say is: 'Don't worry about anything else. It's all about supply. Take the ropes off the animal spirits in the economy'—blah, blah, blah—'and it will all take care of itself.' Well, they abolished the National Housing Supply Council, the body that was put in place to help coordinate increases in supply, encourage local governments to look at their planning conditions and encourage state and territory governments to take the brakes off. That body, which was doing good work, was abolished by those opposite. We don't accept the circumstances that face people in Australia doing it tough when it comes to achieving what should be a basic human right: safe, secure and affordable housing, the foundation of everything. We don't accept that.</para>
<para>We are stepping back into that space. In short order the Minister for Housing has introduced a comprehensive range of measures and funding, because the neglect of the last 10 years can't be allowed to continue. The Commonwealth has a role to help support housing options for all Australians, but particularly for those fleeing domestic violence, as well as younger, low-income, older, and poorer Australians. The Help to Buy 2023 Bill is one of those measures, along with a whole range of things that we're doing after a decade of neglect.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VIOLI</name>
    <name.id>300147</name.id>
    <electorate>Casey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>There are times in your life that you simply never forget, whether it's meeting your partner—remembering that first time you saw them or your wedding day, if that's a path you choose—or the 'sold' sticker going up on your very first home. Those are very important times that you don't forget. Those four letters on that sign are a culmination of years of hard work, saving and sacrifice for a place to call your own. It's the great Australian dream, and it's still very much alive, but there's no doubt that that dream is under extreme pressure right across the country, including in my electorate of Casey.</para>
<para>Australians of all ages are working hard to take their first steps on the property ladder. We know that 85 per cent of renters aspire to own their home. As policymakers, we have a responsibility to do what we can to help all Australians reach their potential and reach that great Australian dream. As a first principle, we as a country need to create a situation where any Australian that wants to own a home should have the opportunity to own a home. However, this scheme that we are talking about, the shared-equity scheme in the Help to Buy 2023 Bill, is not going to achieve that for the Australian people. We know it's not the answer, because the uptake of shared-equity schemes in state jurisdictions shows that.</para>
<para>Labor's plan is for the federal government to contribute 40 per cent of the purchase price of a new home, or 30 per cent for an existing dwelling. They talk about their policy saving homebuyers up to 40 per cent of the money needed for a deposit. However, what they fail to mention is the upwards of 40 per cent tax that homebuyers will face upon selling their home, or throughout the life of the loan, in paying the government back their 40 per cent share. Under Labor's scheme, you own part of your home and the government owns the percentage that they contributed. Australians want to be able to own their own home, but they don't want Anthony Albanese and the government sitting at the kitchen table waiting for their slice of the profits in years to come.</para>
<para>There are a lot of challenges in the Help to Buy Bill 2023 that I'm going to talk to, and this bill is another example of this government promising a lot and not delivering on it. They promised, with all its flaws, that this scheme would be introduced by 1 January 2023, and here we are, in February 2024, 12 or 13 months later, and it's finally been introduced in the midst of a housing crisis. It's a bad bill that's not going to make a difference, but they didn't even live up to their promise to bring it in over 12 months ago.</para>
<para>It relies on working with the states to make these schemes work. However, as I said before, we already know that there are no full uptakes of these schemes in states. In Victoria, where I live, the Homebuyer Fund, which is a shared-equity scheme, was anticipated to assist up to 13,000 households. So far, there have only been 2,874 successful applicants—a significant gap in Victoria. In South Australia, their HomeStart shared-equity loans began in 2007, and a total of 705 loans have been offered in total. According to the 2021 census, there were 14,254 dwellings purchased under a shared-equity scheme. This comprises 0.13 per cent of the 10.8 million private dwellings in Australia.</para>
<para>This is what we see time and time again with the Albanese Labor government, and the Australian public have worked them out. There's a big headline, a big announcement, but it's actually not making a difference to improving people's lives. They're spruiking this scheme like it will solve all of the problems of the Australian people when it comes to housing affordability, but we know it won't and we know there's not an appetite for schemes like this, because we see it in the data and uptake in states all across the country. This is one of the challenges we have with this government. They talk about this being the solution. We've seen that the uptake is not there. But, even if the uptake was subscribed fully, it's 10,000 Australians each financial year at a cost of $5.5 billion to the Commonwealth government. Even if it was fully taken up, it's only 10,000 people, but we know it's not going to be.</para>
<para>But there's an even more significant challenge with this scheme and these bills, and it is in the detail and the unintended consequences that we need to look, and should be looking, as lawmakers. I was recently contacted by a constituent who purchased her first home using a shared-equity scheme in Victoria that's similar to this method that Labor is proposing. She is a professional woman who works in the finance industry, and I'd like to share, with her permission, a part of what she wrote so we can understand the unintended consequences of these schemes:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I was fortunate to buy my first home using the Victorian Home Buyer Fund program with a 15% equity share with the Victorian Government.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">It put me in a position to create a home for myself and my two children, providing security and safety. I have a good understanding of my budget and accounted for interest rate rises when purchasing.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I am proud of the way I have managed my money as a single parent in the face of rising interest rates and cost of living. Unfortunately, I have recently discovered that I need to have brain surgery for a tumour in my brain. I anticipate I will need around 2 months off work, with full recovery to take up to 12 months.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I have been proactive in preparing for this unexpected event and recently contacted my bank about getting assistance with my mortgage. I qualify for hardship, but when going through the options for hardship, it was limited due to the Shared Equity Program. Both options available to me meant that once I was out of hardship, my repayments would increase to recoup the lost time and payments. I was advised that my repayments would increase by $29 a fortnight to keep me within the loan term. I know that might not seem like a lot, but for me, it is a significant amount.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The other option I had was increasing the loan term, which wouldn't impact my repayments. However, this option isn't available to me under the Shared Equity Scheme.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Being a single parent, I am already finding cost of living difficult. We don't go on holidays, we don't have subscriptions, I cover the basics and that is it.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I feel that I should have the same options available to me as other mortgage holders and not be disadvantaged for participating in a program designed to make homeownership easier.</para></quote>
<para>I want to thank my constituent for sharing that story. It's an example of why the details matter when it comes to programs like this. It is not about putting it through so the Prime Minister and others can stand up and talk about how they're trying to make a difference, and we saw that in the state Labor shared-equity scheme. This person has been caught up because the details are not clear.</para>
<para>That's the reality of Labor's scheme. It leaves us with more questions than answers. What happens if you make improvements to your home? Will you have to send an invoice or ask for approval to renovate your bathroom or to fix your roof? Will the ATO be auditing your income to ensure it doesn't rise above the eligibility threshold? What happens if the market falls? Will you be forced to sell your house for less than you paid for it? What lenders are participating in the scheme? And, importantly, can the government guarantee that people taking up this scheme won't be caught in the same situation as my constituent, being limited in the hardship options when they desperately need them? These are questions that the government aren't able to answer, and that's why the detail matters.</para>
<para>There's really only one certainty about Labor's Help to Buy scheme: when it comes time to sell, homebuyers will be hit with a housing tax of 40 per cent as the government takes back its share. It doesn't seem fair and reasonable that, if you own a property jointly with the government, it's your responsibility for all the repairs, maintenance, rates, bills and everything else associated with the house—you've got to pay for all of that—but when it comes time to sell the government comes and takes its 40 per cent back. It's not a bad deal for the government: all the perks and none of the responsibilities.</para>
<para>We hear those opposite talk about the coalition and the last 10 years, and they like to say that nothing was done. The problem with that statement is that it isn't borne out in the facts. The coalition has a proud record in helping Australians into homeownership. Our approach is to support aspiration and help make homeownership a reality. In the last three years of the coalition government, our policy saw more than 300,000 Australians purchase homes. Under the coalition, first home buyers reached their highest levels in 15 years. We established the National Housing Finance and Investment Corporation, now Housing Australia, which supported over 21,000 social and affordable homes. More than 60,000 first home buyers and single-parent families picked up the keys to their first home through the coalition's Home Guarantee Scheme, avoiding costly lenders mortgage insurance.</para>
<para>We took to the election a suite of homebuyer policies which would have delivered, including the super homebuyer scheme, which would have allowed first home buyers to invest up to 40 per cent of their super, up to $500,000, to help with the purchase of their home. The great thing about this scheme is that you would own all of your home. But some argue that it's a trade-off for your retirement savings by putting it into housing. Under this scheme a homeowner, when they sell that house, would be required to put that equity into their superannuation and into their retirement.</para>
<para>Let's compare and contrast the policies. The coalition believes that superannuation is your money. We believe that homeownership is crucial to security and safety and engagement with your community. We want to allow Australians to take some of their money, their savings, out of their superannuation to put into homeownership—40 per cent, which is the same amount as the government scheme. But then we're saying that, when you sell that house, you get to keep 100 per cent of the equity increase in that house, and you're required to put that 40 per cent growth into your superannuation to look after your retirement.</para>
<para>What does the government say? They say: 'You can't do that. You can't touch your money in superannuation. We will give you that money. We will give you that money, but we'll take 40 per cent of your house. And, if that increases in value and you sell it, we'll take that 40 per cent back.' How does that help Australians with their retirement? And they say, 'Any costs you have accrued along the way, any maintenance and any improvements you've made, we will just take our 40 per cent on top of that.' That's the reality of this scheme.</para>
<para>We're seeing people understand this. That's why the uptake is so low at state level. This is a new scheme that is not required because there are so many places already available. The Australian people have spoken with their feet. If they wanted these schemes, they would have already signed up to them at the state level, but they have not. They don't want the Australian government owning 40 per cent of their home. This is a policy that is designed to allow the Prime Minister, in his campaign launch, to stand up and talk about cheaper mortgages when the reality is mortgages have gone up 12 times under this government. It's not going to deliver a tangible difference for the Australian people. We've seen that and we know. That's the reality of this government. It's all spin. It's all politics. It's not providing tangible solutions to the housing crisis for the Australian people.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CLAYDON</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
    <electorate>Newcastle</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Albanese Labor government understands that housing is more than just a roof over someone's head. It's about employment, it's about school and it's about friends and family. It provides security and economic wellbeing. And it's about being able to participate in the community. That's why the Albanese Labor government is committed to bringing homeownership back into the reach of Australians by helping more and more Australians around the country to move into their own home.</para>
<para>For many Novocastrians homeownership can feel like a far-off dream. Data released late last year showed the income required to buy a unit or a house in Newcastle was above the national average and higher than capital cities such as Melbourne. Homebuyers in Newcastle need to earn an income of more than $237,000 to comfortably service a house mortgage. Those in the market for a unit in Newcastle would need to earn a minimum household income of more than $181,000. In comparison, in Melbourne, a household income of $171,000 is needed to comfortably service a house mortgage. The average full-time salary in Australia is around $96,000, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics data, and slightly less in Newcastle. I know these statistics won't come as a shock to Novocastrians trying to get a foot into the housing market.</para>
<para>These statistics tell a story. Once upon a time, the Australian dream of buying your own home was achievable without intergenerational wealth. But owning a home has decreased over successive generations and is becoming more and more unrealistic. We want to change that. Our government understands the seriousness of this issue, which we've already acted on. We know it will take a suite of measures to help bring homeownership back into reach for more Australians, and that is exactly what we are doing. One of our key election commitments was expanding the Home Guarantee Scheme, helping eligible home buyers secure finance sooner through government support. We've recently reached an important milestone with this scheme, having now helped 100,000 people into homeownership, including 2,235 in Lake Macquarie and Newcastle. That's more than 2,000 Novocastrians who now, thanks to the Albanese Labor government, own a home who would otherwise not.</para>
<para>The Home Guarantee Scheme enables an eligible homebuyer to buy a home with as little as a five per cent deposit, and the government guarantees the other 15 per cent. This saves homebuyers from having to pay lenders mortgage insurance, meaning a savings of tens of thousands of dollars. We know that the average time to save for a deposit on a house on a medium income now exceeds a decade. The Home Guarantee Scheme means people who can service a loan for a mortgage but can't get over that hurdle of getting a deposit together are given a foot up.</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government has also expanded eligibility of the Home Guarantee Scheme to allow joint applications between friends and family members, not just single, married or de facto applicants, and that's a great thing. We need more choices, more housing options in Australia, not fewer. The results speak for themselves. Almost one in three first home buyers are now using this government scheme—a significant increase from the last year of the former Liberal government. It's just one part of our ambitious housing reform agenda.</para>
<para>The Help to Buy scheme, the legislation that's before the House this evening, is another piece of help we're providing to Australians trying to set up their own home. It's help for thousands more Australians wanting to own their own home. Through Help to Buy, the Commonwealth will cut the cost of buying a home by up to 40 per cent. Participants will require only a minimum of a two per cent deposit and will benefit from lower ongoing mortgage repayments through having a smaller home loan. It will be the first national shared equity scheme of its kind, supporting up to 40,000 eligible Australians with purchasing a home. This scheme will be open to applications for four years, with 10,000 places available each year.</para>
<para>The Help to Buy Bill 2023 gives Housing Australia the power to enter into shared equity arrangements. Eligible participants will be able to access the scheme through participating lenders alongside a standard mortgage. This scheme will help participants overcome both the hurdle of saving for a deposit and the hurdle of servicing a mortgage. That's because the Commonwealth will provide an equity contribution, and scheme participants will have lower ongoing repayments due to the smaller home loan being taken out in the first place. The financial risk and benefit, capital gains and losses will be shared between the participant and the Commonwealth proportionate to their interests. All states have agreed through the national cabinet to progress legislation so the scheme can run nationally. That is a great thing. We have every state and territory in Australia signed up to this scheme.</para>
<para>The bill also includes the administrative framework for Help to Buy, including that Housing Australia must report to the minister on an annual basis, the minister must cause a review of Help to Buy as soon as possible after the end of three years from the commencement of the bill and that regulations for Help to Buy may enable administrative review of Housing Australia's decisions under the program.</para>
<para>Help to Buy will be open to assist people who have owned homes before and those who haven't. It will help couples, singles, siblings, friends, people close to retirement, those just starting out in the workforce and anyone eligible in between. This is an ambitious government committed to a housing agenda that will improve housing affordability and supply. Whilst we're often told by those opposite that it's states and territories that bear the primary responsibility for housing, including the provision of homelessness services, the Albanese Labor government has an ambitious housing reform agenda to ensure that all Australians can have a secure and safe place to call home. That's unlike those opposite, who say, 'It's not our responsibility,' and wash their hands and take no responsibility for providing citizens with one of the most basic of citizenship needs and rights—that is, safe affordable housing. They insist, 'No, no, no, it's not our job.' They anticipate voting no, but I beg them to rethink what they're doing, particularly those in regional seats.</para>
<para>Labor's housing agenda beyond this bill includes a $1.7 billion one-year extension of the National Housing and Homelessness Agreement with states and territories, including $67.5 million in boosts to homelessness services. We've also got the development of the new National Housing and Homelessness Plan. We have the $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund, the first of its kind; a national target to build 1.2 million well-appointed and well-located homes; $3 billion in a new homes bonus; and $5 million for the Housing Support Program. There's the national housing accord, which includes federal funding to deliver 10,000 affordable homes over five years from 2024, and that will be matched by another 10,000 from the state and territory governments; the $2 billion Social Housing Accelerator fund to deliver around 4,000 new social homes across Australia; an investment of an additional $1 billion in the National Housing Infrastructure Facility, again, to support more homes; and up to $575 million in funding already unlocked from the National Housing Infrastructure Facility, with homes under construction now. Remember that those opposite tried to block these bills before, saying that we couldn't do it, we were too ambitious and that it was not our responsibility and not our job. Well, those homes are under construction now.</para>
<para>The government also increased the maximum rate of the Commonwealth rent assistance by 15 per cent, the largest increase in more than 30 years. These are things that only Labor governments ever worry about and, indeed, deliver on. There's the additional $2 billion in financing for more social and affordable rental housing through Housing Australia. We've got new incentives to boost the supply of rental housing by changing arrangements for investments in build-to-rent accommodation, and the states and territories are committing to a better deal for renters to harmonise and strengthen renters' rights right across the nation. This is good news. This is good news for every generation of Australian citizens.</para>
<para>Those opposite often like to regard themselves as the party for homeownership, yet they will oppose this bill. I've never met a Liberal in this Australian parliament who actually thinks that they have a role to play in the provision of housing for our citizens. Usually their answer is: 'No, no, no. That's the job of the states and territories.' That's no matter how dire the situation and no matter how big a housing crisis our nation faces. That is not the Labor way. Indeed, it is only Labor governments that have ever stepped up to deliver housing policy at a national level.</para>
<para>This is legislation that will deliver one of the most basic fundamental rights for citizens, and that is access to a safe and affordable place to call home. There is nothing more basic. There is no more basic need than that in our country. Chifley understood this, the first of the great Labor leaders to invest in federal housing programs. That was followed by Whitlam, who also fully understood the importance of housing and proper services and who delivered sewerage to the suburbs. Again, this was vehemently opposed at the time. 'It's not the job of federal governments,' we were told. These are people facing dire circumstances with very clear, obvious needs. I'm not sure how those opposite look those people squarely in the eyes and say, 'Sorry, it's not our job.' We know that was the mantra under the former government. My one piece of advice to members opposite is: do not carry that through your term of opposition.</para>
<para>Australians who are squeezed out of housing markets and rental markets and are deeply worried about their capacity to have a safe, affordable place to call home will not thank you for shirking your responsibilities. They expect a government to be able to listen to their cries and formulate policy and legislation that in fact delivers on their needs. We've seen it following Chifley and Whitlam and, of course, when we had the Hawke and Keating governments, who understood the need for a national housing policy. This was followed through by Rudd and Gillard. Then we go back to the hiatus during the Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison government years. No homes were to be built then. For Labor leaders and Labor members in this parliament, the idea that you would wash your hands of any responsibility to deliver housing for citizens at a time of tremendous need is utterly abhorrent. It is unimaginable. But I guess, when you've got a target of building zero houses, it's little wonder that no new housing ever came to fruition.</para>
<para>We do have an ambitious plan. We are a government that acts. We're not content to sit back and say: 'Not our job. Not us. Not Labor.' Australians can have a safe and secure place to call home. We should be working every day and every night to ensure that is possible. Delivering on Help to Buy, alongside all our other housing commitments, is part of that commitment to the Australian people. It's what drives our government every day. Our ambitious housing reform plan is working, and you should support it.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BIRRELL</name>
    <name.id>288713</name.id>
    <electorate>Nicholls</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Help to Buy Bill 2023 and the Help to Buy (Consequential Provisions) Bill 2023. I am opposed to this bill, because I believe this isn't a serious attempt to solve what is a significant problem in Australia at the moment. Similar programs have caused problems. On this side, we are opposed to the principle of excessive government involvement in peoples' affairs, and there are too many unanswered questions in relation to this piece of legislation. There will be a lot of speeches in the House about the importance of homeownership, and nobody disagrees with that. But the conflation of housing affordability with the scheme proposed in this bill is disappointing, and—if I could make an observation, being a new member of parliament—it's one of the bait-and-switch things that I see passing for debate in this place. It manifests itself in omnibus bills, where there'll be one good thing in it and about 50 things that are no good. People who are supporting it will castigate everyone, only talking about that one thing that everyone agrees on and not about the 50 things that are no good. But this follows that sort of logic. 'There is a problem, it needs a solution, and this is our proposed solution; therefore, this must be the solution.' It's worth noting that I don't think this particular solution is a solution to the housing crisis. It is a niche program and a flawed one. It's worth noting—and I will address this more in detail—that the only housing policies delivering support to first-home buyers, as borne out by my discussions with people in the industry and homebuyers in my electorate, are the housing policies that Labor inherited from the former coalition government.</para>
<para>What is Help to Buy? Help to Buy is a shared-equity scheme. It purports to make it easier for people to buy a home, but there's a catch. Your equity partner is the Australian government. It purports to be easier because eligible homebuyers are supported by the government. They don't have to contribute as much towards a purchase and so the deposit they require is smaller, as low as two per cent. With a shared-equity partner, they're saying you can get a home sooner or, more accurately, you can you get a loan sooner. But you'll also owe the government and they'll have to be paid back over time or when you sell.</para>
<para>Help to Buy will be open to only 10,000 households each financial year and will cost the Commonwealth $5.5 billion. That's if it reaches its targeted take-up. We have serious doubts about this because Australians don't love shared-equity schemes, especially when their equity partner is the government. The majority of states already offer their own shared-equity products, and these schemes are so unwanted by many Australians that there are places remaining in each of the available state based schemes. If they are not popular with Australians, why have one that comes from the federal government? Is it the case of being seen to do something?</para>
<para>The United Kingdom have had a help-to-buy scheme and it has been open to criticism. I'm not suggesting that this scheme that we are debating now is exactly the same as that UK help-to-buy scheme, but there are legitimate concerns that should be contemplated about what happened in the United Kingdom. We can look to them to see what some of the positives were but also what some of the perverse outcomes were. Graeme Leach, who is the chief economist at the Institute of Directors in the United Kingdom, described the scheme as 'dangerous' and said it would drive up prices. This was his quote in the <inline font-style="italic">Telegraph</inline> newspaper back in July 2013:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The housing market needs help to supply, not help to buy and the extension of this scheme is very dangerous. Government guarantees will not increase the supply of homes, but they will drive up prices at a time when it seems likely that house prices are already over-valued …</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">When the scheme is withdrawn any rise in prices that has taken place will be undermined, with potentially disastrous results. There is a real risk that the housing market will become dependent on the underwriting by government, making it very difficult politically to shut the scheme down.</para></quote>
<para>Again, this is not the scheme we are debating. I concede that. But lessons can be learned from these government equity schemes in other parts of the world, and there are concerns about driving up house prices.</para>
<para>There are legitimate concerns that we have in the context of this bill. Will it contribute to further growth in house prices? Will it be found after five years of operation that three out of every five applicants who bought a home would have been able to afford it anyway, as was found by the UK National Audit Office on the UK scheme? Will it encourage those for whom homeownership may not be the most suitable option to take on undue financial risk? Could it divert resources from supporting people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness including because of rental stress?</para>
<para>There are a number of reasonable questions that we have in relation to this legislation that I think we should have answers to. What is the scheme's eligibility criteria? What happens when a person involved in this scheme makes improvements to their home? Will they have to send the government an invoice for repairs or maintenance? Will the government collect capital gains windfall based on the homeowner's investment in any improvements they've made? What happens if a person involved in the scheme earns a cent above $90,000 for an individual or $120,000 for a couple? Will the government force the sale of their home? Will the ATO be auditing incomes? If you participate in it, what are the reporting obligations? What happens if housing prices fall and you are behind with your mortgage payments? Will the government force you to sell your house for less than you paid for it? How many of the 40,000 places will be available in each state and territory? What lenders are participating in the scheme? These are all reasonable questions that I think should have been ironed out before bringing the bill into this place.</para>
<para>The question I think we need to ask when having this debate in a constructive way is: is there a better way of helping Australians realise their dream of homeownership? There are a few. There are some really good ones that were implemented by coalition governments. The first one I've had discussions with people in my electorate about. That's the Home Guarantee Scheme. Over the last three years, the coalition government's housing policies have supported more than 300,000 Australians with the purchase of a home. Remember with this Help to Buy scheme we're talking about only 10,000 a year over four years, a fraction of what the coalition was achieving. The coalition supported almost 60,000 first home buyers and single-parent families into homeownership through the home guarantee schemes, consisting of the First Home Loan Deposit Scheme, the New Home Guarantee and the Family Home Guarantee, with deposits of as little as five per cent or two per cent. The coalition's Home Guarantee Scheme is now supporting one in three first home buyers. We protected the residential construction industry with more than 137 HomeBuilder grants, generating $120 billion in economic activity.</para>
<para>These raw numbers talk to the fact that there were some very positive things happening during the previous government's term, but it's not just the numbers of people; it's who it helped. Of the 60,000 guarantees issued under the home guarantee schemes, 52 per cent were taken up by women—well above the market average of 41 per cent. One in five guarantees went to essential workers, almost 35 per cent of which were nurses and 34 per cent of which were teachers. There is a worker accommodation shortage and there are difficulties, particularly in regional areas, caused by a lack of supply. That, in my view, is caused by red and green tape, which is a legacy of the way that our state and local governments operate sometimes. But we do need to look after essential and professional workers and encourage them into regional areas.</para>
<para>In addition, there was the very successful HomeBuilder scheme. During the COVID pandemic, more than 137,000 Australian families applied for the HomeBuilder grants of $25,000 towards a new or substantially renovated home. The scheme delivered a secure pipeline of construction work that kept hundreds of thousands of tradies and small businesses in work.</para>
<para>The real issue is affordability, and what is being done now and what could be done in the future. In metropolitan areas, affordability is becoming a problem. The lack of supply is pushing prices up, and incomes aren't keeping up, particularly with the inflationary problems that we have at the moment. In regional areas affordability is still there. I'll pick some figures out. You can buy a house in Shepparton, in my electorate, for $450,000, and there are successful couples that are doing very well, perhaps earning a household income of $120,000 to $150,000 a year. Homeownership is a real option there, and that's a really good thing. In my own experience—I won't tell you what I bought my first house for, but it wasn't much, because it was back in 2003. My wife and I weren't earning a lot of money back then, but we scrimped and saved to get together a deposit. We bought a small house in Shepparton, and we were able to service those mortgage repayments. We were fortunate enough to have professional jobs in regional areas.</para>
<para>I think we can debate these schemes: our scheme is better than yours and your scheme is better than ours, and here's a government that's prepared to own a bit of your home, which you think is a good idea and we disagree. But we need to look a bit larger when we think about homeownership in Australia and, indeed, where people are living and working in Australia. I hark back to my maiden speech. I talked about my vision—and many others' vision—for regional Australia, and Australia more generally, and the need to look at population rebalance in our nation. I believe there are too many people living in our cities. Our cities are growing fast and sprawling in an unplanned way. In Australia we've got cities heading towards five to six million people, such as Sydney and Melbourne. In some cases this growth is unsustainable, in relation to public transport and other facilities.</para>
<para>Look at a country like Germany, which has a population that's significantly larger than ours—over double. Instead of having these big megacities that are sprawling out, they have smaller, regional cities linked by high-speed rail and surrounding major manufacturing centres. I was there last year and I saw this myself. Wouldn't that be a better way to plan our nation—to plan where we put people and where we build houses? The growth and the strategic development of regional Australia is what we're about. That's one of the reasons I put my hand up to try and come into this parliament as a National Party member—I see the opportunity of regional Australia, what it can achieve and what we could do by having significant cities outside our major metropolitan areas, linked by high-speed rail, with thousands and thousands of professional people living and working.</para>
<para>I believe this relates to homeownership because it's a lot cheaper to set up these greenfield places outside regional cities than it is to continue to sprawl out of suburban Melbourne or Sydney. I think that would be a positive thing for our nation. What's holding that back is the planning regimes that developers have to go through to open up land to build houses. A farmer might be very happy to see a place outside a regional area that is currently a paddock be rezoned as a residential block. The process to go from there to the point where someone is actually able to pour a slab and build a house takes, in some cases, six to eight or 10 years, and that's not keeping up with the demand for houses in our nation.</para>
<para>We need to streamline that. It's the responsibility primarily of the state governments, but the federal government has got a role to play there too. We can ensure that we get more people living sustainably and, in my view, more people in regional areas, close to where they work and embedded in supportive and connected communities. You only need to come to some of the cities in my electorate, such as Shepparton, Echuca and Seymour, to see how that works. It works really well.</para>
<para>I think that government equity in people's home loans is not a good idea. I think that there are too many unanswered questions in the way this particular scheme is going to work, and I don't think it's a serious attempt to look at a big-picture vision of how we improve homeownership and population rebalance in our nation of Australia.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ROB MITCHELL</name>
    <name.id>M3E</name.id>
    <electorate>McEwen</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>'Going once, going twice, sold' was a phrase that once was the beginning of the Australian dream for working Australians, which for many has now become a pipedream. We're here to change that. The Albanese Labor government will cut the cost of buying a home by up to 40 per cent for 10,000 Australians per year. Help to Buy will help Australians buy a home with a smaller deposit, smaller mortgage and smaller mortgage repayments. This will cut the cost of some mortgages by up to $400,000.</para>
<para>The scheme will mean that eligible homebuyers will have an equity contribution of up to 40 per cent of the purchase price of a new home and 30 per cent of the purchase price for an existing home. With only two per cent of the price needed for a deposit to qualify for a standard home loan, 10,000 people that have been kept out of the homeownership market due to the initial cost will be able to achieve homeownership a lot easier through a dramatic decrease in the initial price. They'll be able to qualify for a standard home loan with a participating lender to finance the rest of the purchase a lot more easily than it has been before.</para>
<para>Decreasing the initial barrier to homeownership allows more hardworking Australians to enter the housing market. Help to Buy is intended to support Australians who would otherwise not be able to purchase a home. That's why the government is committed to an ambitious housing reform agenda, which includes establishing the Help to Buy scheme to help more Australians into their own home. We understand that we have a housing crisis in Australia, which developed under the stewardship of those opposite, and homeownership has become harder than ever before. It's harder now in cities, it's harder in the regions, and it's harder in our local communities. There has been a massive drop of homeownership, especially for low- and moderate-income earners. If you're not a trust fund baby, it seems like you should just give up on the Australian dream.</para>
<para>We know that many older Australians, single parents and those from minority backgrounds are more vulnerable and find it a near impossibility to enter the housing market.</para>
<para>Even just looking at 40 years ago, when 60 per cent of young Australians on low to moderate incomes owned their own homes. It's now down to 28 per cent.</para>
<para>The Help to Buy scheme before us today is just one element of the Albanese government's plan to improve housing affordability, honouring our commitment from the last election.</para>
<para>We've already legislated the $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund, the $3 billion Social Housing Accelerator program and the largest increase to Commonwealth rent assistance in 30 years.</para>
<para>We know this is not going to fix the crisis overnight but it's laying the foundations to build a sustainable and fit-to-work housing system after the years of neglect we have seen.</para>
<para>We are investing in the future of housing for younger generations.</para>
<para>The government understands that affordable housing is critical to Australia's economic wellbeing, and with National Cabinet we are making sure people across our country can get access to the scheme.</para>
<para>Once the scheme is established, 10,000 people over each the next four years will get access to lower deposits and lower mortgages.</para>
<para>This is on top of the more than 86,000 people who have accessed the Home Guarantee Scheme, including the 13,000 Australians who have acquired home ownership through the Regional First Home Buyer Guarantee.</para>
<para>We know this policy will bridge the gap that many Australians experience when entering the housing market.</para>
<para>People within our electorates also know that this is a scheme that could also potentially open the doors of a new home for them.</para>
<para>A resident of Hurstbridge has been in regular contact with my office regarding the incoming Help to Buy Scheme. Since we announced it at the last election, he has been desperate to jump on board to apply.</para>
<para>As an older Australian, who wants to achieve the Australian dream, he sees it as his chance to actually get there.</para>
<para>I look forward to when the political games end and I can finally inform him that applications have opened.</para>
<para>We have the opportunity to get this scheme through parliament to help people right across the nation.</para>
<para>The only roadblock to people accessing this scheme is getting the legislation through and pass the egos who seek to block it.</para>
<para>The government is giving people the housing stability that people deserve to live fulfilling and safe lives.</para>
<para>As we look to get this legislation through, despite roadblocking by the coalition and the preaching of the Greens, I want to share a story with the parliament from a single mother in the electorate of McEwen and I want those who are blocking the bill to listen to this:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I have been a single parent for close to 11 years.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">In 2013, upon my marriage breakdown and the sale of our home, I found myself a 41 year old woman back in the rental market, something I never expected after having worked hard and sacrificed to save for a deposit close to 15 years earlier, this time with three dependants 14, 8 and 5 years of age.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">While I had a small settlement from the sale of our home, as a low-income earner I was unable to secure finance to purchase my own home.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">There was no bank keen to approve a loan for a woman on a single income with three dependent children. (At the time I could not even get approval for a $1,000, 12-month interest-free deal on a TV!)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">While I am university educated and was working in my field of study, it is not a profession which pays a great deal, which continued to affect my ability to get a loan.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">And while over the last 4 years I have been lucky enough to find roles within this profession to increase my income, it still hasn't been enough.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">We are a single income home. I have paid for the education of my oldest two children who are now young adults and still have one child at school.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The cost of my children's education meant that a fair proportion of the settlement I received went to them.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Further, I live in a regional area which has also had an impact on the opportunities available to me and the amount I can earn.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Without close family support, I have needed to rely on childcare and working close to home to raise my children.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I am now 52 years old and often hear the largest growing cohort of homeless people are women of my age and in my situation.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I also do not have a great deal of super because for many years I was only working casually—if at all with young children—and at the time our priority was to add extra to my former partner's superannuation to take care of both of us in retirement … and that's not the way it panned out.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I know that I am lucky that I am fit and healthy, allowing me to hopefully have the ability to work as long as I like, but no one knows what's around the corner.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The prospect of trying to survive renting on a pension or rely on the generosity of my children is not one I want to entertain. Labor's Help to Buy scheme is a perfect example of the way a government can provide a leg up to someone in my position, who despite the best laid plans finds themselves locked out of the housing market and not enjoying the security that comes from your own home.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">As other members of our community know renting is stressful.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Whether it is the 6 monthly checks or the constant fear of eviction.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">In the first 3 and a half years we had to move 3 times after selling our home. Whether it was due to landlords moving back in or the sale of the rental property.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">For someone trying to provide stability for children who had undergone a massive family upheaval the constant relocation was a nightmare.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Add to that the recent rent increases continue to impede any ability to save for a deposit, and while interest rates have been a problem for mortgage holders they will decrease as inflation drops.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I doubt the rent will follow.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Rents will not go down unless a substantial increase in available properties becomes apparent as the competition for tenants will remain.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">This scheme will give those on low and middle incomes an opportunity to buy a home with at least a 2 per cent deposit, allowing them to access home ownership which is linked to short, medium, and long-term economic security.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">It helps people overcome both the hurdle of saving for a deposit and the hurdle of servicing a mortgage, with the Commonwealth providing an equity contribution, meaning scheme participants will have lower ongoing repayments from a smaller home loan.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">This is the only way I can see myself being able to get back into home ownership… short of winning Tattslotto!</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The Help to Buy scheme is a great program for women like myself.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Even without the current cost of living, single income homes have always done it tough and the security to be able to have a home I could call my own, and not constantly feel like I am just treading water—would be amazing to me.</para></quote>
<para>That's a very important story, and it just shows those opposite aren't listening to what's actually going on in the real world. It's easy to sit there and say, 'Oh, we don't think this will work,' and then not put up any options about how things could be done better. We know that under the previous government their HomeBuilder scheme, or as it was commonly known 'rich people's bathroom renovations'—that's all it delivered. It overheated the market.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Hill</name>
    <name.id>86256</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Gold taps!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ROB MITCHELL</name>
    <name.id>M3E</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Gold taps were one of the things, yes. It overheated the market. It meant people were paying more to get homes built and homes repaired than what it used to cost because there was this free money getting thrown around without concern. So many people entered the previous coalition government scheme only to find out it was shortened because of the delay, because of COVID and because of a whole range of things, such as shortages in workforce and supplies. That left some people with signed contracts that wouldn't be completed on time, and therefore they lost the ability to access that support.</para>
<para>What's important is putting people at the centre of this. We're trying to find ways to give people like the lady I talked about security and peace of mind. We know quite a few people who have multiple houses, including some that sit over there and preach that no-one should have a house and that it should all be social. We've got to look at how we find the best way to help people get security. Buying a home when you've got have a trusted partner like government to help and support you is so important.</para>
<para>The story I read was a meaningful story, and no-one should, in good conscience, stand in the way of making housing more affordable. No political point is more important than providing housing security to our most vulnerable. It's a shame that the Liberal and the Nationals and the Greens continually form their new coalition to prevent better access to housing. I think about how in my time here there's never been a public housing program that they haven't opposed. They don't like support for public housing. The new tree/tory coalition will never stand up for hardworking Australians. They continue to block important legislation to increase access to homeownership. This new coalition doesn't stand up for working-class Australians. It simply prioritises cheap political points over housing security. Just look at the antics of the member for Griffith the last time housing was brought up.</para>
<para>After years of inaction in housing that has left the market almost impenetrable for many Australians, we will continue to look for new ways to legislate and to make entering the housing market more achievable for the average Australian. This bill is one of the many ways the Albanese Labor government is honouring our commitment to tackle the housing issue across the country, and I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HAMILTON</name>
    <name.id>291387</name.id>
    <electorate>Groom</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>You find me in a state of absolute shock. I just heard a Labor member stand up and speak ill of throwing money around willy-nilly. I think this is throwing out the entire Labor Party scheme and the building blocks of the whole Labor Party—a government that came in and increased spending by $188 billion and now wants to talk about the ills of throwing money around willy-nilly. Goodness me!</para>
<para>But let's go through it further to the points made in the previous speech about not listening to the Australian people. If the government think that what the Australian people want is not homeownership but homeownership with an asterisk, then they're not listening. They're not tuned in to what the people of Australia are saying. I'll comment further on the last speaker who was making slight jibes about people owning multiple houses. I think that a quick look at the front bench might be useful to see the property portfolio of their own leader. If they want to raise issues like that, I think that's quite easily dismissible. To make what we're talking about clear, it raises the issue of working-class Australians. Once again, we're straight into class warfare from this government in their attacks over this one. What a joy it is to come after such an insightful speech on the true intention of the Australian Labor Party!</para>
<para>I will pick up one issue, though, that was raised about the impacts of government schemes driving prices up. A scheme very similar to this in the UK had exactly that impact. It inflated prices by more than its subsidy values in areas where it was most needed. One of the terrible things that we come across in the great lessons of history is that we take no lessons from history. This has been tried. This results in driving prices up, particularly for the most vulnerable. This is not about helping Australians one iota.</para>
<para>Let's talk about what this is. This is giving up on the thing that I think I've heard every speaker talk about so far: the great Australian dream of homeownership. This is setting out to climb Mount Everest, getting to base camp and saying, 'I got there.' I think that this issue matters—the nature of the ownership of one's house. I think it is important. It's beyond just the physical asset. It's beyond the little piece of paper that says, 'This is mine.' It's what that means as a family setting forth to start their family home, whatever shape that may be. It is some place in Australia that is theirs—a place that they have worked hard for, that they can be proud of and that in every single way reflects who they are and is their base. It's their castle.</para>
<para>I reflect upon my own grandfather coming back from the Second World War and falling in love with his beautiful wife. He raced as quickly as he could—the member for Leichhardt will enjoy this—to build the house with his own hands before his first child was born so that she could come into a house that he'd made himself. That spirit carries on today; you talk to anybody. I had the pleasure of talking to young homeless kids in my electorate, at Base Services, about what they want in life and about what they aspire to. They started off with things like a car or a girlfriend, but inevitably they got to the same point: a home, a place of their own. This isn't going away. This matters. People want to know that this is their home. They don't want to know that it's homeownership in partnership with the government that is subsidised. They want it to be theirs. I think that's a good thing. I think that is the aspiration in Australia that has driven so many of the good things that this country offers to people from all around the world who choose to come here and join this great Australian experiment of ours.</para>
<para>I think it's important to point out that this is not a new thing. This is a scheme that has largely been tried amongst the states in Australia. In the midst of a housing crisis—I think we can all acknowledge that's exactly where we are: a housing crisis—it's particularly hard. Being on the Economics Committee, I've heard over and over again from the RBA and all the major banks that the people getting squeezed the hardest are those young 25 to 29-year-olds who would usually be trying to save for a deposit to get onto the housing ladder. But, with inflation and the cost of everything rising, they're unable to. They're renting and their rents have gone up, and they're unable to get on that housing ladder. Presented with this option, some are taking it up, yes, but these schemes provided by various state governments are undersubscribed. In a housing crisis, they're undersubscribed. The suggestion that what is needed is more of this is an extraordinary step. These measures are being taken and they are undersubscribed, and, for that to be the case in a housing crisis, I think that speaks to the broadness of their appeal.</para>
<para>But, if you're willing to go through those two hoops, if you're willing to forgo homeownership in full without that little asterisk hanging over your head and if this is an option for you, there is an issue that I think is worthy of being raised, and it's about the nature of the contract you are entering into and the high level of trust that you are engaging in. For so many people, this is your family home, this is 30 years of repayments and this is everything that you base your hopes and dreams, your way of life, around. And you're entering that with that need for a high level of trust in an environment, particularly on issues of the economy, where that trust has not been on display from this government.</para>
<para>I go back again to the over 100 times that this Prime Minister promised that he would stick with the stage 3 tax cuts, and he then changed his mind. Now, those opposite can say that he stayed with the tax cuts—that's fine—but the details matter, and they matter significantly when it comes to the issue of homeownership; to how it impacts your household finances, your plans for the future; and to how that will play out as your life carries on. These things are important. So, when assessing this, I think the Australian people would do well to ask, 'Is the basis of trust there to enter into this contract with this government?' Clearly it's not. Clearly, when the politics and the polling of the day make it easy for a government to change its mind, despite multiple promises that it wouldn't do so right up to the death, that trust just isn't there.</para>
<para>To go to the key, the heart of where we're at in the broader context, and to where we find ourselves with this, this is a government that has said multiple times that the key issue of the housing crisis we have is supply. We've heard that, and this certainly is not in any way addressing supply. There's no attempt to pretend it is—nor is it addressing the issue of increasing demand. We've seen 500,000 new Australians join us in the last 12 months, with the prospect of another 1.2 million, I think, joining us over the next five years, all of which will continue to drive that demand up higher. The simple equation of supply—a good outcome at the moment is the supply rates staying the same. Unfortunately they've been dropping, and I'll get to that. With supply not changing and demand going up, we will see prices continue to rise. That's the forecast for us at the moment.</para>
<para>I'll go back again to my opening comments. When this sort of scheme was applied in the UK, the result was that house prices increased by more than the subsidised value, particularly in areas where it was needed most. So those most vulnerable will see those house prices rise. Those who choose to seek full homeownership will watch house prices rise more than the subsidised value of this scheme.</para>
<para>I want to explore the depths of the supply issue we have, and I'm going to start with a column that I hope is more digestible to those opposite. It's in the <inline font-style="italic">Guardian</inline>, that great bastion of right-wing thought: Australian housing approvals sink to lowest level in 12 years amid rising costs and planning delays. So we have inflationary pressures and regulatory pressures putting our housing supply at over 10-year lows. For the full year leading into 3 February, we saw approvals total 162,200, the lowest annual rate since March 2013, according to the NAB. Clearly, the NAB's comments are quite strong. Unfortunately, they say, 'A supply fix is not coming in a hurry.' What are the issues in front of us? What will help homeownership? What will help people realise that dream in the way my grandfather, my parents and new Australians coming from around the world seeking their own homes did? What are the delays and issues? They're construction costs and inflationary pressures in an environment where we've added $188 billion of spending and tried to pretend that wouldn't be inflationary. At a time when we've got the RBA trying to take money out of the economy by raising interest rates, we've got a government pumping money back into the economy. We've got one foot on the accelerator and one foot on the brake. We're going nowhere and wondering why, and we're just going to blow out the engine.</para>
<para>It's policies and interventions like these that seem at their heart to have good intentions and the burning desire to address a need in society. But it's their consequences. Unfortunately, what this government isn't doing is addressing those key issues that they can address. They're not reducing demand. They're not reducing the number of people coming from overseas, who are now entering the housing market, driving prices up. They could do that in a heartbeat, but they've decided not to. They made it very, very clear again in question time today when asked about the impact of immigration numbers on house prices. They refuse to address it. They refuse to acknowledge the increased demand their policies are producing in Australia or the impact on young first-home buyers.</para>
<para>I could go further. The ABS shows total dwelling approvals fell 9.5 per cent in the 12 months leading to December 2023. We are on a downward descent in terms of supply issues. We're not going upwards. We're hurting. We're going backwards. As we've seen, when very similar policies were deployed in the UK, it had upward pressure on prices. I go back again to this point. There is a fundamental divergence here around the role of homeownership that I think is being exposed. I think we see very clearly that it is not the view of the government that the nature of homeownership matters, whereas we on this side acknowledge something different. We think it does matter. We think that owning your home outright, in your name, is a worthy ambition. I think it's about being able to say: 'This is mine. I live here. I provide this for my husband, for my wife, for my children. This is what I have created. This is the place where I get to contribute to the continuation of Western society. This is where my family stories will be told. This is where the memories will be made.'</para>
<para>It matters that you own that outright and it's yours. That's the difference. I think the Australian people want to hear that we acknowledge that that difference—that belief that outright homeownership, without a little asterisk—is important. There's a very clear difference being put in this debate. Those on this side strongly stand by those Australians who have that aspiration and want to own their own home in their own name. We stand with those people. We will not give up. We will set out for Everest acknowledging the great challenges in front of us. They are many and will not be solved in the short term, but we will not set up on that ambition, give up at base camp and try to tell people that this is homeownership—that we've taken this first step, and that's going to get us there. The issue is more than that. The issue is more than just bricks and mortar or a roof over your head. The issue is your ability to have a place of your own, in your own name, outright, that you can be proud is yours. It's an ambition that Australians have held for such a long time, and I hope we can continue to hold it. I think it's worthy of fighting for. I don't think giving up on that ambition is worthy of the Australian people. I don't think that's what we're called to this place to do—to get halfway towards a solution, pack it up and start the marketing campaign. I think we should aim for higher ambitions than that.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HILL</name>
    <name.id>86256</name.id>
    <electorate>Bruce</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I had the misfortune of sitting through those 15 minutes. I know that it's good for members to try speaking from notes or speak off the cuff, but I think next time that bloke needs to get his staff to write him a speech and he should read it out faithfully. It was just rhetorical, circular nonsense.</para>
<para>Let's focus on what the bill actually does as opposed to the fantasy island or Enid Blyton interpretation over there. The Help to Buy Bill 2023 is a hugely important bill that will change lives. It's part of the government's ambitious agenda to improve housing affordability, including the $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund, the $3 billion Social Housing Accelerator payment, the largest increase to Commonwealth rent assistance in 30 years, action on homelessness, the expanded Home Guarantee Scheme and the Regional First Home Buyer Guarantee. Initiatives have already helped more than 100,000 people into homeownership since the election, delivering $25 billion in new housing investments over the decade.</para>
<para>It is appalling that, yet again, here we are observing the Liberals and the Greens political party teaming up to try and block action on housing. The only things standing in the way of this important reform to help 40,000 Australians into homeownership—people trying to buy their first home—are the coalition and the Greens.</para>
<para>What does the bill do? It's the first national shared-equity scheme of its kind. It will help 40,000 Australian households to purchase their own house. It would include a Commonwealth equity contribution to eligible participants of up to 40 per cent of the purchase price for new homes and 30 per cent for existing homes. Over four years, that's 10,000 places available per year. Homebuyers would need a minimum two per cent deposit. This will mean lower ongoing repayments while people are in the scheme, and that means long-term relief.</para>
<para>There are numerous people in my electorate—in Dandenong, Endeavour Hills, Hallam, Doveton, Narre Warren, Berwick and elsewhere—who stand to benefit from this scheme. It'd be delivered in partnership with all states and territories. States will pass their own legislation in 2024 for the scheme to operate in their jurisdictions. It went through National Cabinet last year.</para>
<para>The benefits of a well-designed, well-delivered shared-equity scheme are enormous. For those participants who are eligible, it'll help them to overcome both the hurdle of saving for a deposit and the hurdle of servicing a large mortgage. The Commonwealth equity contribution means that scheme participants will have lower ongoing repayments from a smaller home loan. The financial risk and benefit—the capital or losses—will be shared between the participant and the Commonwealth proportionate to their interests.</para>
<para>This should be a no-brainer. It's not a magic bullet. It's part, as I said at the start, of the government's ambitious housing agenda to improve housing affordability. It's a practical, responsible scheme which will help up to 40,000 Australians. Let's be frank: the housing market has been stuffed over recent decades. Homeownership rates between generations have decreased significantly, particularly for lower-income households, and it's lower-income households—people without the bank of mum and dad to help them into the market—that this scheme is intended to help. The average time to save for a deposit on a house in Australia on the median income now exceeds a decade. As I said, there's no magic bullet. The ultimate answer is to increase housing supply, but the government also needs to actively work to help people enter the market and to bring homeownership back into reach for thousands of Australians who've been locked out.</para>
<para>It should be a no-brainer, but, yet again, the unholy alliance of the Liberals and the Greens political party are teaming up with Peter Dutton and Barnaby Joyce—the Leader of the Opposition and the member for New England—to block action on housing. The Prime Minister has rightly described their repeated efforts to block action on housing as 'incomprehensible'. The last time that they tried this, with the Housing Australia Future Fund, he said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… it is incomprehensible that at a time when housing is an issue and where everyone knows that housing supply is the issue … they continue to block this legislation.</para></quote>
<para>And they're doing it all over again.</para>
<para>Now, Australians wouldn't be surprised that the Liberals say no. That's all they do. They say no to jobs, no to wage rises, no to fairer tax cuts and no to better working conditions. No. They vote no to lower energy prices. And now they're voting no to action on housing. The Leader of the Opposition has nothing to offer Australians but negativity and anger and division—literally, not one positive plan.</para>
<para>The Greens, however, are trickier, as the member for Wills well knows. They give fiery speeches about supporting social housing. There are lots of memes on social media because, if you're from the Greens political party, judging by their behaviour the only purpose of being in parliament is to wedge the government or the opposition and get a meme up on social media. It's 'Stunts R Us'. Once a week, there they are, getting the meme. Every bill, every debate, is an excuse for another meme, for the Greens. But when it comes to the crunch, when it's time to actually put their hands up and vote for action on housing, they put their own political posturing and product differentiation before the right outcomes for Australians, particularly the most vulnerable people in our society.</para>
<para>And it's not just here. Greens political party councillors on councils right across the country constantly vote no to more housing. They constantly oppose new development which would increase supply. The Greens in the federal parliament constantly vote to block action on housing. The Greens care more about prosecuting their own housing agenda than about helping Australians in need.</para>
<para>But let's have a look at the opposition—the shadow minister. He was offered a meeting to discuss the points which he raises in the media, but he's not prepared to actually meet with the minister. It's all stunts and press releases. Perhaps the silliest of his claims is that this scheme is 18 months delayed. He's outraged, the shadow minister, because the scheme's 18 months delayed, according to him. Well, the scheme didn't have a start date, but it's little bit ironic that he's complaining the scheme was delayed when he's actually delaying it by refusing to vote for it, stringing it out and locking out more low- and middle-income earners from owning their own home. The government has been working carefully over the last 12 months with all the states and territories on the design of the scheme. As I said, it was ticked off by National Cabinet, and the states will be passing parallel legislation this year.</para>
<para>The second complaint, which we heard from the previous speaker, the member for Groom, was this: 'People aren't taking up those state schemes, and states have these schemes anyway. Why do we need a national scheme?' It's true; some states do have shared-equity schemes, including the formerly Liberal state of New South Wales and the formerly Liberal state of Western Australia. Those schemes have provided useful insight into the design of Help to Buy. But there are large states that still do not have a shared-equity scheme. Also, some state schemes are very tightly targeted. They're all different. This is a scheme that would be open to a larger number of eligible Australians.</para>
<para>Those opposite also complain that the technical detail, like the eligibility criteria, has not been provided. Like most legislation like this, that's just a nonsense argument. The legislation doesn't provide every bit of technical detail. It sets up the framework to allow the Commonwealth to offer a scheme like Help to Buy. It's entirely appropriate and indeed entirely normal that the detail of these kinds of schemes is set out in program directions, to allow for flexibility. Ironically, that's exactly how the former government designed the Home Guarantee Scheme that it set up. Our government was very clear in the election campaign what the criteria would be. We'll be consulting soon on the detailed program directions, and of course the shadow minister is welcome to be part of the consultation. I wouldn't hold my breath, given he likes to complain about things and not actually turn up for the briefings.</para>
<para>We also heard the previous speaker say that Australians don't want this scheme. There are a lot of people in my electorate that do want this scheme, that would be in a position to access it and, indeed, that have contacted my office, asking when Help to Buy is starting. The only response we can give them is: 'Ask the Greens political party and the Liberal Party, because they're the ones blocking this scheme.' It's incredibly disappointing.</para>
<para>The other nonsense that's spread is 'we've seen nothing on first home buyers from this government'. Since the election, we've helped more than 100,000 people into homeownership through the Home Guarantee Scheme. And, when the government were elected, we acted quickly to improve and expand the Home Guarantee Scheme and to introduce the Regional First Home Buyer Guarantee three months earlier than promised.</para>
<para>Importantly, with those changes, the government also expanded the guarantee to non-first-home buyers who haven't owned a property in Australia in the last 10 years, which is really important to help those who have fallen out of homeownership often due to financial crisis, time out of the labour market or relationship breakdown. We also expanded the existing scheme in July this year to allow friends, siblings and other family members to apply for the First Home Guarantee and the Regional First Home Buyer Guarantee. Under those opposite, they were locked out. The only people who were eligible when they were in government were married people or single people. There will be a huge boost in take-up thanks to Labor's changes.</para>
<para>I will finish by picking up on some of the comments of those opposite. I wrote one down. The previous speaker was calling out policies that seem to have at their heart good intentions and things which might actually push up prices. Possibly the stupidest housing policy ever is the only policy they had on housing—to let people access their superannuation to buy a house. It would do two things. It is quite genius if you're going for the gold medal for stupidest policy. It would push house prices up by putting petrol on the fire of house prices. People would turn up to an auction with all their superannuation in their pockets and bid up the cost of housing. The only person that wins out of that is the person selling the house. The second genius move it would cause is to trash people's retirement savings. A low-income earner with 20 grand or 50 grand in their super may as well put the vacuum cleaner into their super account and suck it into the pocket of the guy selling the house. Just throwing the cash away is all it would do. That's their genius policy.</para>
<para>They want to vote against action on housing. They want to vote against everything the government is doing, and yet they want to push up the cost of housing. Here's a tip for them: you don't make housing more affordable by making it more expensive. If they were really serious about housing policy, the first thing they'd do is march into their party room tomorrow and say, 'We are going to drop this dumb policy we've got to push up the cost of housing.' I don't think they're going to do that. It is interesting, isn't it? The current Leader of the Opposition said back in 2017 in relation to the policy that they're pushing:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… you don't want to fuel the prices. You don't want to create a situation that is worse than what we have got at the moment.</para></quote>
<para>He should follow his own advice, shouldn't he, and dump his policy? The shadow finance minister and then minister for superannuation in relation to the policy of letting people suck out their super and push up houses prices admitted it. She said, 'It'll probably push up prices.' She should listen to herself. Even the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, that well-known property investor in the Gold Coast, had something to say. She agreed with those comments and said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Young people need their super for retirement, not to try to take pressure off an urban housing bubble …</para></quote>
<para>It's not a serious policy. There's a reason why even Mathias Cormann when he was finance minister and every previous Liberal prime minister ruled this out. It's a nonsense policy. It would make the problem worse. It's the kind of policy you have when you want to take focus off the fact that you have no serious housing policy. It's a little bit like suggesting having small modular nuclear reactors everywhere to take attention away from the fact that you have no energy policy and you just destroyed the last three prime ministers by fighting about the lack of an energy policy. A small problem also is that there are no small modular nuclear reactors in the world, but they don't let that get in the way of their talking points.</para>
<para>So the only policy we have from those opposite, who are voting against the government's action on housing, is to let young people raid their own retirement settings, which, as the Grattan Institute said, would do little if anything to increase homeownership rates. I commend the bill to the House, and I encourage those opposite to march into their party room tomorrow and say: 'We've got it wrong. We need to dump our stupid policy and we need to actually vote for the government's legislation which will do something for 40,000 Australians to help them into the homeownership market.'</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LE</name>
    <name.id>295676</name.id>
    <electorate>Fowler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Help to Buy Bill 2023. I have to say that this bill sounds great. It's a really headline-grabbing name—'help to buy'. It's what I would call clickbait. At a time when everyone is talking about the affordability of owning a home, to have our government putting up a bill that says 'help to buy' sounds like our government is really helping people to buy a home. But is it really going to help more Australians buy a home?</para>
<para>I understand it was the Prime Minister's election promise when he launched his federal campaign in 2022 to help more 'hardworking Australians' to 'achieve the great Australian dream of home ownership'. That's quoted from the bill digest.</para>
<para>With a federal election looming, this Help to Buy Bill would no doubt have appealed to voters, just with its name. But, as a relative newbie in this House, listening to all these policy announcements, I can't help but wonder: what is truth, what's campaign messaging and what's reality?</para>
<para>At a time when people are feeling the pain of the rising cost of petrol, continuing rises to the cost of energy, soaring food costs, rent, insurance—you name it—having a bill that's supposed to deliver 10,000 homes each financial year, with a total of 40,000 places, you could be fooled into believing that the government has thought through this piece of policy to increase home ownership.</para>
<para>When my family first arrived in Australia from refugee camps, we knew that if we worked hard and saved we'd eventually be able to own our first home. Back in those days cost of living wasn't an issue. My sisters and I eventually did, moving out of our public housing in Western Sydney to own our own homes.</para>
<para>However, successive governments' policies have now brought us to this juncture, where the cost-of-living and housing crises are forcing the government of the day to come up with policies that are so disconnected from reality.</para>
<para>A recent 9News article revealed that one in six people are depending on credit cards for daily expenses, just so that they can survive cost increases. There's barely any equity for them to even consider saving for their own property. Saving is no longer an easy feat.</para>
<para>This reality is nowhere more acute than in my community in Fowler in Western Sydney. Fowler is one of the lowest socioeconomic electorates in the country. Every dollar that's spent counts. My constituents often have to choose between paying for bills and groceries or saving for a house. The rental market is another conundrum, with Fowler recorded as the fourth-worst for rental affordability in Australia.</para>
<para>This proposed Help to Buy Bill is reportedly designed to alleviate stress on low- to middle-income earning Australians to purchase a home through a national shared equity scheme. Under this proposed scheme, eligible Australians can enter into a shared equity scheme arrangement with Housing Australia on behalf of the Commonwealth, whereby the Commonwealth will provide an equity contribution of up to 30 to 40 per cent of the purchase price. I understand that the states would need to opt into the scheme by referral under the Constitution or adoption of the Commonwealth legislation.</para>
<para>Other crossbench members have spoken on this bill, with support for this initiative based on the concept that is intended to help middle working Australians own a home.</para>
<para>It is my understanding that such an initiative operated in New South Wales, whereby the government could contribute up to 40 per cent of the purchase price for a new home or 30 per cent for an existing dwelling. Where this scheme fell short was with its limited take-up. Not everyone had a fair go at accessing the scheme. It was almost like a lottery draw where only lucky individuals could pluck a spot, while others looked on with anxiety, wondering when it was their turn.</para>
<para>While the idea sounds altruistic, with Help to Buy providing equity of access to ownership, it doesn't really address the most critical issue—the shortage of supply and the affordability of buying—making it out of reach for many working Australians.</para>
<para>The pain points of the housing crisis can be reduced to two key words: supply and demand. It's therefore imperative for the government to address concerns with any potential supply imbalance. The government must commit to coordinating further supply-boosting measures with states and territories such as tax incentives—taking off the layers of taxes that are burdening the building of new homes, to assist first home buyers.</para>
<para>Whilst there is significant demand, there are not enough incentives to massage the streams of housing supply.</para>
<para>Fowler has settled nearly 10,000 refugees in the past few years, and the number will continue to rise. As such, the demand for housing will grow exponentially. It is inevitable that the proposed 10,000 positions available across the nation will fail to satisfy the ever-growing demand for housing. If the government has a stake in the property via the scheme, there is a bigger incentive for prices to increase.</para>
<para>I also call into question the accessibility of this equity scheme. Irrespective of the minimal spots open, the income and property price caps further impose barriers that narrowly restrict access and increase the difficulty of earning a place in the scheme. Irrespective of the minimal spots open, the income and property price caps further impose barriers that narrowly restrict access and increase the difficulty of earning a place in the scheme. It is my understanding that a single Australian citizen must earn $90,000 or less in order to qualify for the scheme. A large number of my constituents fall under this threshold. According to the ABS data from 2021, the median weekly income of an individual in our electorate was reported to be about $521 a week, as I mentioned earlier. This amounts to about $27,092 annually, a stark difference from the national median annual income of $41,860. If this scheme were to be implemented, many constituents in Fowler would be vying for a loan, and there's no way the demand will be met. On the other hand, for a single individual earning $90,000 in income, with a monthly net income of approximately $5,707, after paying for the necessities of rent, utilities, insurance, groceries, a car and likely servicing a HECS debt, there is little left over. How would this measure allow for an individual to put a roof over their head when the numbers just don't add up?</para>
<para>Co-owning a property with the government is a very interesting concept, according to one of the local brokers in Fowler, but she questioned whether mums, dads and the older generations would allow the government to have a hand on their property. Even if they did, who's going to be responsible for maintenance? How will that be managed? But, even before we go to who's going to be responsible for maintaining the property, based on my simple calculations above, an individual earning $90,000 can only get a loan of around $410,000. If the government is to provide 40 per cent of the support, 60 per cent of $950,000 is $575,000, yet a person on an income of $90,000 can only get a loan of $410,000.</para>
<para>What about their ability to repay the debt after taking out all the costs that an individual on $90,000 has, such as food, petrol, car loan, car registration, health insurance and phone bills? I did a rough estimate and calculation, and all these costs amounted to about $4,855 a month, including for those who have HECS debt. This individual would be left with about $852 a month, so how would they be able to take to take out a loan and manage the mortgage?</para>
<para>Just from those simple calculations and that example, the thresholds are too low. For example, an experienced teacher's income exceeds the cap for a single person, and they cannot apply. This is why the proposed salary threshold should allow for a 10 per cent increase to accommodate critical first-home buyers who are key workers, single parents with dependent children, singles aged 50-plus and domestic violence victims. Alternatively, the thresholds should be upped by 10 per cent for everyone.</para>
<para>The price cap imposed on properties—$950,000 for capital cities and regional centres and $750,000 for the rest of the state—is surely not sufficient. In one of the areas in my electorate, Canley Vale, the median house price was reported to be over a million—$1,069,000—and this is expected to increase by 11.2 per cent. This is just one example of a region in my area that would be barred from the scheme despite the constituents in my area needing additional support for affordable housing the most.</para>
<para>We have yet to address how young people can even get a loan when their HECS debt is accruing at 7.1 per cent indexation and possibly rising. Lenders don't like young people with HECS debts, which means the road to getting a loan is a tedious one. Again, why can't we freeze indexation for these HECS students? I call on the government to take this into consideration and listen to the next generation, who are crying out as home buyers are facing the worse mortgage affordability in more than three decades.</para>
<para>Although affordability of property is the desired outcome, this may not be the case. Additional demand for houses under this scheme may place pressure on prices, which ultimately benefits sellers and not buyers. Furthermore, the implementation of this scheme may encourage those in financially vulnerable situations to take on undue financial risk. There are still grey areas on what happens if someone were to default on their Help to Buy agreement. It is also worrying that the scheme does not accommodate or clearly define what happens if someone on the scheme exceeds the annual income threshold. It is my understanding that the Help to Buy scheme allows for the eligible person to buy back the government's equity stake five percent at a time. I question why ownership needs to be limited to a percentage at all.</para>
<para>I appreciate the government's incentive to reduce the burden and relieve the financial stress for homebuyers to purchase their dream home. However, we are still faced with the issue of limited spots for the scheme, thus the housing crisis and supply crisis will continue. Let's move beyond the headline-grabbing policies into real policies to show that this government is connected with working Australians and understands the crippling challenge that the majority are facing with the cost-of-living and housing crisis.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms FERNANDO</name>
    <name.id>299964</name.id>
    <electorate>Holt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The great Australian dream embodies the typical aspiration of every Australian family to own their own home. For generations, the image of owning a home on a block of land has been deeply engrained in the collective consciousness as a symbol of success and stability. For many migrants, the aspiration to own a home reflects their desire to establish roots, build a sense of belonging and provide stability for their family in their adopted country. The pursuit of homeownership is not merely a financial endeavour but a deeply personal journey rooted in values of hard work, perseverance and the desire to provide a better life for oneself and one's loved ones.</para>
<para>This dream is one my family has pursued and is why I am proud to stand here today to speak for the Albanese Labor government's Help to Buy Bill 2023 and Help to Buy (Consequential Provisions) Bill 2023. These bills are crucial steps in fulfilling our commitment to the Australian people, a commitment made during the 2022 election, to make the dream of owning a home a reality for thousands of Australians. This significant proposal stands as the pillars of hope and progress in our ongoing efforts to address the housing affordability crisis gripping our nation. At the outset, it is important to provide context regarding the prevailing housing landscapes in Australia. For too long, skyrocketing property prices and stagnated wages have conspired to push homeownership further out of reach for many Australians, particularly those on low and middle incomes. Young Australians have had it the toughest, with many giving up on homeownership all together. The dream of owning a home, once considered a cornerstone of the Australian way of life, has become an elusive aspiration for far too many.</para>
<para>Homeownership rates between generations have been on the decline significantly. At the same age in their life, 55 per cent of millennials own their own home, while this rate was 62 per cent for gen X and 66 per cent for Boomers. In my electorate of Holt, where 24.4 per cent of the population are under 15, gen alphas leave me with the question what will be the future for them? The average time to save for a deposit for a house on an medium income now exceeds a decade. In 2001, the average home was 4.7 times the average income. Today, in Melbourne the average home is over 10 times the average income. This means people need to save for twice as long and pay twice as much for the same properties as they did 23 years ago.</para>
<para>Recognising the urgency of this issue, the Australian Labor Party made a commitment to the Australian people during the 2022 election to implement a help to buy scheme aimed at supporting up to 40,000 Australian households in their quest for homeownership. Today, with the Help to Buy bill before parliament, we are taking tangible steps forward towards fulfilling this promise—tangible steps forward helping those new families in Cranbourne, in Clyde, in Hampton Park and in Narre Warren South buy their first home. Central to these bills is the Help to Buy shared-equity scheme, a groundbreaking initiative at the national level. It is designed to provide crucial financial support to aspiring homeowners. Under this scheme, the Commonwealth will provide an equity contribution of up to 40 per cent for new homes and 30 per cent for existing homes, significantly reducing the burden of saving for a deposit and servicing a mortgage.</para>
<para>This means that, in my electorate of Holt, a young family could build a new three-bedroom home worth $650,000 for only $390,000. At a 6.5 per cent interest rate and with repayment over 30 years, this would result in weekly payments of $570, slightly more than the $470 per week to rent a similar property. The benefits are that you end up owning a house at the end. The benefits are that you have stability and do not need to negotiate with landlords on the volatile rental market every 12 months. The benefits are that you secure a legacy for yourself and your family. For a nurse or a teacher earning $75,000 a year, this keeps the cost of homeownership under one-third of their post-tax income, meeting that critical definition of affordable housing.</para>
<para>This represents a remarkable shift in our approach to homeownership, offering a lifeline to individuals and families who have long felt excluded from the property market. By reducing the required deposit down to two per cent, it keeps the initial deposit in reach for most families, compared to a five or 20 per cent deposit as required on most mortgages. On a $650,000 home in Cranbourne, this is only $13,000. By requiring participants to contribute at least a two per cent deposit, we are instilling a sense of ownership and responsibility and fostering a culture of self-reliance and resilience.</para>
<para>It is essential to emphasise that the Help to Buy scheme is not only a mere handout; it is a hand up—an opportunity for hardworking Australians to achieve the dream of homeownership through their own efforts and determination. Furthermore, the Help to Buy scheme is underpinned by the principles of fairness and equity. By sharing both the financial risk and benefits between the participant and the Commonwealth, we are ensuring that the burdens and rewards of homeownership are distributed equitably. This collaborative approach not only enhances the sustainability of the scheme but also underscores our commitment to fostering a more inclusive and equal society.</para>
<para>The Help to Buy scheme will be delivered through Housing Australia. Eligible participants will be able to access the scheme through participating lenders alongside a standard mortgage. Crucially, the Help to Buy scheme is just one element of our broader strategy to improve housing affordability and accessibility across Australia after a decade of inaction from those across the floor. Under our government, we've already been able to help more than 100,000 people to buy a house through the Home Guarantee Scheme. This scheme has allowed people to buy a home with a five per cent deposit without paying for lenders mortgage insurance.</para>
<para>We have re-asserted federal government leadership over housing policy after a decade of chaos and inconsistency by working with the states and territories to set a goal of constructing 1.2 million new, well-located homes over the next five years. This target underscores the collective determination to meet the growing demand for housing and enhance affordability nationwide. In support of this objective, the federal government has pledged $3 billion in performance based funding through the new homes bonus initiative, incentivising states and territories to exceed their respective shares of the housing target. By encouraging reforms to bolster housing supplies and affordability, this funding aims to make a tangible difference for Australians aspiring to homeownership. The goal is bolstered by the endorsement of the national planning reform blueprint, which outlines measures such as updating strategic plans, promoting medium- and high-density housing in well-connected areas and streamlining approval processes to enhance housing supply and affordability.</para>
<para>We have also established the $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund, the largest investment in social housing projects in decades. This fund will support the delivery of 30,000 new social homes over the next five years. Likewise, the $2 billion Social Housing Accelerator payment is a testament to our commitment to providing safe and secure housing for the most vulnerable members of our society. It will allow state and territory governments to build 4,000 additional social housing units through to 2028. Moreover, the significant increase in Commonwealth rental assistance, the largest in 30 years, reflects our unwavering commitment to supporting those struggling to meet the cost of renting. By bolstering rental assistance, we are providing much-needed relief to individuals and families facing rental stress, ensuring that no Australian is left behind.</para>
<para>The Help to Buy scheme shines as a ray of hope in a housing market that has been steadily declining for young Australians. By empowering Australians to achieve their dreams of homeownership we are not only building strong communities but also laying the groundwork for a more resilient and prosperous nation. I thank the Hon. Julie Collins, the Minister for Housing, for her hard work on this vital reform and putting homeownership back in the reach of so many families. Whether individuals are approaching retirement, just entering the workforce or anywhere in between, Help to Buy stands ready to provide support, welcoming them into the housing market.</para>
<para>I urge all members in this House to support the passage of these bills for, in doing so, we will reaffirm our commitment to the fundamental principle that every Australian deserves a place to call home. I say to the Greens: I call on you not to hold this legislation hostage. Do not delay this bill like you delayed the Housing Australia Future Fund. Do not hold hostage the dream of homeownership for 40,000 Australians. Do not hold up this vital reform on some aspirational hill. This reform is practical and can be implemented immediately and will deliver for working Australians across this nation.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TINK</name>
    <name.id>300124</name.id>
    <electorate>North Sydney</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Since the 47th Parliament first convened on 26 July 2022 we have had 187 pieces of legislation pass this place, with a further 113 still under consideration. This means that, in 18 months, over 300 pieces of legislation have been considered here at a federal level. On behalf of my community of North Sydney, every piece has been critically reviewed, not just looking at what is said but trying to understand what problem the legislation is trying to solve and how its effectiveness is going to be measured. Frequently I've been asked to support legislation moved before the provision of substantive details. In every case this has made me extremely uncomfortable and I have voiced this discomfort to the minister involved. And so it is that that's where I find myself today: being asked to support the passage of legislation that, in my opinion, raises more questions than it provides answers.</para>
<para>While the headlines generated by the Help to Buy Bill 2023 and the Help to Buy (Consequential Provisions) Bill 2023 look good, there are very real questions I believe all of us should be demanding be answered before we pass this legislation. Currently it's difficult to have any sense of whether this legislation will have an impact on housing availability and affordability. Yes, many in the sector have been calling for this type of government intervention at the federal level for some time. And, yes, there are people right across this country who would benefit from additional support to help them get a leg up in the housing market. But, ultimately, while we are told this legislation will address both of these desires, the truth is that the how of it is simply not addressed here. Rather, on the face of it, this legislation presents as something that is simply bureaucratic. It's objective is to empower a government body—that being Housing Australia—to enter shared-equity arrangements on behalf of the Commonwealth in relation to residential property. It goes on to say that this empowerment is required so the agency can improve housing outcomes for Australians by assisting low-income and middle-income individuals to buy homes. But it's silent on how that support will be offered. It is silent on how such a small program, which underwhelmingly only seeks to support 10,000 purchases, will even make a dent in the challenge we currently face or how we will know if it's working.</para>
<para>The North Sydney community consistently raises the issues of housing accessibility and affordability and rental stress with me, with many concerned not only for themselves but for future generations. They are concerned that their children will not be able to live nearby in the communities they've grown up in. They're concerned that, when couples separated, individuals can't afford to stay near their support networks, schools and friends. The lack of details and specificity within this legislation ultimately leaves me questioning what its purpose is. How can I go back to my community and tell them that, yes, this legislation will address those concerns?</para>
<para>Stepping right back, I'd argue that fundamentally the problems of homelessness, housing inequality and housing unaffordability stem from a failure to protect the basic human right to housing. In the international human rights context, the right to housing comes within the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which articulates the right to an adequate standard of living. Australia is a signatory to this important treaty and thus recognises, at least in theory, the right for everyone to have an adequate standard of living, including housing and the continuous improvement of living standards. Yet as a nation we have failed to embed these international treaties into domestic law, and this government continues to pass up an opportunity for a human rights centred housing policy. Instead we find ourselves here, debating patchy, piecemeal approaches that lack an overarching and clear objective and fail to adequately deal with the cause of the problem.</para>
<para>I wonder, then, in this instance: is the positive headline really worth the delay in real reform that results as a consequence of its pursuit? From my own perspective, the electorate I represent, North Sydney, is wonderfully vibrant and diverse, and we want that to continue. But, for this to be possible, people must be able to access affordable housing. We want our teachers, our emergency service workers and our healthcare workers to be able to afford to live within a reasonable distance of their workplaces, not, as is often the case, to have to travel 30 to 50 kilometres to get to work or to pay more than half of their salary for a small apartment in the local area.</para>
<para>What, then, would my community like to see us debating in this place today instead? Well, in October last year we undertook to address the issue of housing affordability through a process of deliberative and participative democracy. After we invited 5,000 randomly selected but demographically representative constituents to participate in a one-day community forum on housing, 30 individuals were selected to form a diverse and representative group. These people then spent an entire day discussing the issue amongst themselves and with a range of housing experts, and they were tasked with coming up with a key idea they wanted me to champion in this place. This is a hugely complex and multifaceted issue. The group ultimately presented me with their desire to see more medium-density diverse and affordable housing around public transport hubs, with federal infrastructure funding made contingent on the zoning requirements. They saw this as a way through what is an issue that has been building for years.</para>
<para>Low interest rates, migration, property investment and other drivers have pushed home prices to record highs, locking a growing number of Australians out of homeownership, particularly younger, poorer Australians and those who have lost their family homes following a separation. Indeed, research by the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute released last week shows just how broken our housing system is, with the ability to buy a property becoming increasingly out of reach in Australia and the proportion of higher income earners that rent growing. In our case, 40 per cent of the people who live in North Sydney rent, and they rent for longer than they ever have.</para>
<para>This shouldn't be a surprise, as even back in 2021 the census told us that ownership rates were dropping, with 67 per cent of people owning a home in 2021 compared to 70 per cent in 2006. Back in 1971, two-thirds of 30- to 34 -year-olds owned their own home, yet by 2021 that had dropped to 50 per cent. For Australians aged 25 to 29, the difference was similar: 50 per cent of them owned their own home in 1971, while only 36 per cent owned their own home in 2021. Homeownership rates have also gradually decreased among people nearing retirement. Homeownership rates for those between the ages of 50 and 54 fell from 80 per cent to 72 per cent over the 25 years from 1996.</para>
<para>At this point in time, then, I think it's worth noting that there are already a number of government programs that offer support for first-time homebuyers, low-income households, Indigenous Australians and vulnerable people, with the four main types of support being home purchase assistance, the First Home Owner Grant scheme, the First Home Super Saver Scheme and the Home Guarantee Scheme. In fact, in the 2020-21 year about 44,200 instances of home purchase assistance were provided across Australia. Of these, over a quarter of the main applicants receiving assistance were aged 35 to 44. About a fifth of the recipients earned a gross income less than $700 per week. More than half were in major cities, with a quarter in inner-regional areas and one-in-10 in outer-regional areas. Only a very small proportion were in remote or very remote areas. At the same time, lending commitments to owner-occupier first-time homebuyers increased from 81,650 commitments in the 12 months to May 2017 to 138,400 commitments in the 12 months to May 2022.</para>
<para>With so much movement around what is commonly known as the 'great Australian dream'—that being to own your own home—as a parliament, I can't help but think that we need to ask ourselves the really hard question: do we really want to continue to set homeownership as the ultimate goal of our nation, or is it time that, as a parliament, we bravely lead a discussion around what constitutes a home and how people can have the security of one without necessarily needing to own it or bear the burden of massive debt to keep it? Ultimately, a help-to-buy program such as this one is one of several short-term, demand-side initiatives that the government has at its disposal to assist those in the community hoping to make the great Australian dream a reality. It is, in general, a more cost-effective measure than other types of first-home buyer assistances as the government recoups its investment. It contributes less to house price inflation, as the homeowner has less capital to apply to their next home purchase once the government recoups its equity stake.</para>
<para>After many decades of neglect, this sort of short-term relief does not provide what we ultimately need, which is longer-term, real reform. The fact that many of the key components of the Help to Buy scheme are found only in the explanatory memorandum, with the program details to be set in non-disallowable program directions rather than in primary legislation, is particularly concerning for me. Many of the details of this program, including the upper limit of the Commonwealth contribution and the minimum deposit requirements, will be in the program directions, which are proposed to be a legislative instrument not subject to disallowance and exempt from sunsetting. This leaves several questions unanswered, including: why is the program being designed with a four-year tenure rather than making allowance for the possibility of a reinvested revolving fund? What is the economic return to the government? Is the government relying solely on capital gain? Is it also exposed to loss? How is the return recouped if a loan is paid off before the property has sold? Does the cost base change with any future capital investment by the purchaser through property renovation? Is the government's loan subordinated to the participating lenders mortgage? If an owner chooses to purchase a larger stake in their property, how will the value of that share be calculated? What are the assessment criteria measures of success vis a vis other homeownership support initiatives? Perhaps most crucially, what is the process for allocating or awarding program places, given the number of qualifying applicants are certain to far exceed the number of investments made each year?</para>
<para>While I acknowledge it is argued the limited scope of the program mitigates against the potential for it to significantly impact house prices, I am concerned that, with only 10,000 places available yearly and over 700,000 homes currently changing hand each year, the process by which applicants are assessed and selected is currently opaque. Surely it cannot be the case that this government is asking this parliament to greenlight a piece of legislation that would see the government invest over $300 million over four years with no obligation to agree how that money is to be distributed. If this reform is important enough to do, it deserves to be done well. Australians deserve more than a headline. Notably, given its lack of specificity or targeting, the proposed scheme would seem to bring little benefit to the people in my community. It doesn't appear to be targeted towards essential workers needing to live closer to their jobs, nor does it seem to be targeted towards young people who wish to live near their families, where they grew up. It definitely doesn't seem to be geared towards offering support for women over 55, who are rapidly becoming the highest-risk population for homelessness in our community. With median prices of $3.4 million for a house and $1 million for a unit in my electorate in 2022, the proposed state cap on dwelling purchase prices for New South Wales cities of $950,000 will limit participation for those who wish to live in North Sydney to units.</para>
<para>Ultimately, Australia's housing system is desperately in need of long-term reform. Sugar hits, bandaid solutions and glamourous headlines alone won't cut it. The government's National Housing and Homelessness Plan was supposed to lead long-term reform. It was meant to provide coherence to the initiatives delivered since the 2022 election, to coordinate activities across all levels of government and, more importantly, to provide a roadmap for the much wider housing reforms that Australia badly needs. Yet the narrow remit of the <inline font-style="italic">National Housing and Homelessness Plan</inline><inline font-style="italic">issues paper</inline>, which was published in August last year, leaves many, including myself, concerned the plan will not achieve its aspirations and ultimately fail to deliver the fundamental change needed to fix the housing crisis.</para>
<para>Specifically, the lack of overarching goals and objectives, the lack of consideration of policy areas relevant to housing, including migration, the settlement policy, income support, financial regulation and tax, and the lack of any clear recognition that the housing system status quo is in need of fundamental change all mean, as we stand here today and are asked to pass this legislation, that we're asked to do so in a bubble of hope rather than the pursuit of tangible change in course. While I can acknowledge there is appetite for a scheme such as this and that this may be a small step towards helping more Australians into homeownership, we need much more ambitious reforms to address the fundamental and enduring housing problems that have been escalating in this country for decades. We need to move beyond headlines and towards true reform.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REPACHOLI</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Help to Buy Bill 2023 and the Help to Buy (Consequential Provisions) Bill 2023. Growing up, it was normal to own your own home. In fact, it was the ultimate goal for any young person entering the workforce to be able to work hard, save your money and be rewarded with the achievement of buying your very own patch of land with your very own house. If you're anything like me and many other Aussie dads and mums, you own your lawn. You put the effort into it, keeping it perfect and green, just for it to eventually die.</para>
<para>I feel that this dream has died for too many young Australians. For too many, regardless of how hard they work, buying their own home just isn't within reach anymore. This is a devastating reality for future generations, and, as a father, this really concerns me. I want my daughters to be able to know that, if they get out there and have a go, they will be able to see the fruits of their hard work when they get back to their own homes at the end of the day. I want them to be able to have the same aspirations of homeownership that the past generations have been privileged to have.</para>
<para>That's why it is our responsibility as a government to make this possible. It is our responsibility to give our young people a chance to own their own home, and that is exactly what we are doing by introducing the Help to Buy scheme. You only have to go back to 1997 to see how quickly things have changed in this country. In 1997, the great Darryl Kerrigan said, 'You can acquire a house, but you can't acquire a home.' But today, 27 years later, it seems like many can't acquire a house either. A man's home is his castle, and everyone who works hard should be able to afford their own home and feel the pride in their own castle. It's a part of the Australian character.</para>
<para>Help to Buy will help Australians be able to afford to buy their own home. It's a straightforward scheme, but it will have a real impact. This scheme will support up to 40,000 eligible Australians to purchase a home by providing an equity contribution of up to 40 per cent of the purchase price for new homes and up to 30 per cent for existing homes. The scheme will help those who need it most. The scheme will give those on low and middle incomes an opportunity to buy a home with at least a two per cent deposit, allowing them to access homeownership, which is linked to short-, medium-, and long-term economic security. In other words, this scheme gives an opportunity that would not otherwise be available to own a home and set yourself up for the future.</para>
<para>One of the biggest challenges when it comes to buying a house is saving the deposit and servicing the mortgage. This bill will help to make these challenges a little easier. With the Commonwealth providing an equity contribution scheme, participants will have lower ongoing repayments on a smaller home loan. Another way pressure is eased for eligible home buyers is that the financial risk and benefit will be shared between the participant and the Commonwealth, balanced to their interests.</para>
<para>This bill shows the real power for positive change that can come when the federal government works with the states with a common goal in mind. Each state and territory will be required to pass legislation for the scheme to operate in their jurisdictions. They all agreed at the National Cabinet in August last year to progress legislation so that this scheme will run nationally. They aren't wasting any time, with all states and territories expecting to have this legislation passed by the end of the year. We are all on the same page and the support is nationwide when it comes to this bill and to addressing the housing crisis, and that can only be a good thing with the states and the federal government working together.</para>
<para>I know how hard it is for everyday people who want to buy a house and set themselves up for the future. I know that often this is just not possible because I see it every day in the Hunter, which has soaring house prices. I am confident that this bill will help the hardworking people of the Hunter to be able to afford their own home, and that is why they deserve this bill to come through. They deserve a government which looks after what's in their best interests and helps them to be secure in life, whether that be through employment, health, education or—in this case—housing affordability.</para>
<para>I would like to remind the House that this is a government completely committed to housing in this country. This bill is only one part of a whole range of steps we have taken to improve housing affordability and to get more Australians into their own homes. We have already introduced the $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund, the $3 billion Social Housing Accelerator scheme and the largest increase to Commonwealth rental assistance in 30 years.</para>
<para>The difference between us and some of the others in this place is that when we say we care about an issue like housing, we actually do and we actually want to address it and we are addressing it. Others say they care, yet they stand in the way, blocking progress from being made in areas where they have the chance to make a difference.</para>
<para>The Greens have shown time and time again they are willing to let the perfect get in the way of the possible when it comes to housing policy, and with their lack of support of this bill it is clear that their attitudes have not changed. The Greens will find any reason to have a sook, and this is one that they are sooking about now. It's like they think that rather than actually helping to follow through on what they said was one of their priorities—helping renters and making housing more affordable—having a cry will win them more votes.</para>
<para>I can see right through their rubbish. They aren't genuine, they don't care about housing and all they care about is votes. That's all the Greens party is about. And because they will never be a party of government, the best way they can achieve this is by playing political games and lying through their teeth. You only have to look at the rot that comes out of the member for Griffith to come to this conclusion. The member for Griffith tweeted, 'The Housing Australia Future Fund will do nothing for renters.' I am not sure if he is ill-informed or whether it is a straight out lie, but either way, he is wrong.</para>
<para>The fact is that Labor policies will deliver tens of thousands of affordable rental properties. As the Minister for Housing said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Of the 30,000 social and affordable homes, we're talking 20,000 social rentals and 10,000 affordable rental homes. We are adding to the supply.</para></quote>
<para>That is what we can do and that is what we are doing.</para>
<para>The member for Griffith and the Greens don't care about housing. If they did, they would support our policies, which have made a real impact for real people looking for a house or a rental. But instead they spread misinformation and make it harder for progress to be made, all while voters who are relying on us to fix the mess that is our housing market are literally left out in the cold. So the next time you hear any of this rubbish coming out of their mouths, do as Darryl Kerrigan would do and tell them they're dreaming.</para>
<para>In the Hunter we are fed-up with the Greens stopping houses from being built—all for their own selfish and petty political games. I'm here on behalf of my electorate to tell them to get stuffed. Get out of the way and let us build houses. Let us make sure that people who want to buy their own house are able to actually afford it, and let us make sure that the housing market is set up for our future generations to benefit from it.</para>
<para>If the Greens don't support this bill, they will be the ones responsible for preventing 10,000 people every year from being able to own or buy their own house. They will be blocking help from going to those who need it and they'll be going against what they say and against what their own values are, apparently. I have no doubt they're considering voting no to this bill, yet still they wonder why they will never be taken seriously as a political party in this country, and we all know why in this place right now, but we'll talk about that another time. They will have to live with the guilt of having weak morals. But I'm proud to be part of the only party in this place that really cares about housing and about making sure that as many people as possible can achieve the great Australian dream of owning their own house.</para>
<para>Not only do we say we care, but this bill shows that we do care. Owning your own house is an amazing thing. I am lucky enough to do this, my parents were lucky enough to do this and many other Australians are, but there are so many other Australians that aren't lucky enough to have this happening for them. It's such a sad thing that there are so many people in the Hunter, so many people in Bennelong and so many people in so many different areas of Australia that unfortunately can't afford to buy their own house right now, and this bill will really help that.</para>
<para>So we need to make sure that we keep this bill going. We need to make sure that we shut the Greens down and stop their petty, pathetic little games that they're trying to play over there on their side just to try to win more votes. That's an absolute disgrace by them. I don't know how they can continue to come into this place day in, day out, saying they care about Australians, everyday Australians, when all they do is try to block every single bill that we put forward. I'm sure that those on the other side of this building will back us up in saying how pathetic the Greens have been and how disappointing they really are as a party.</para>
<para>I'm the member for Hunter, and I know I have a lot of people in my electorate who do like the Greens. I'm happy for them to have their vote however they like, but they need to understand that the Greens party is standing in the way of people owning their own home—and just because they want to have something that they think is an ideal. Ideal isn't always what happens in this country or this world, unfortunately. Look at what is happening in the world right now. There are not many people that would say it's an ideal world right now, that's for sure.</para>
<para>We need to make sure we all get on top of the Greens party and really make sure that they come to their senses, get on board with us and pass this bill. I'm sure the opposition would love to get on board and pass this bill as well, because I'm sure they're nice people on that side, too. I reckon we could all work together here with a bit of bipartisanship and make sure this bill passes through the House. We need to get it through us and get it through the upper house with no changes. It'd be lovely to see it get through.</para>
<para>We also need to make sure that we continue to work together in this place. I'm a new member to the parliament, and we need to make sure that we have a lot of things that we do together on both sides of this place. I do ask of those opposite that we make sure that we can see some more bipartisan work going forward. I know that we won't always see that from the Greens, but I'm sure that us on this side, in government, and those opposite can put some of our moral differences aside. I'm sure that we can put some of our differences aside and make sure we're doing the best thing for Australians. I know that Australians in my electorate want to see us working together to make Australia a better place. I commend this bill to the House and I look forward to seeing what the Greens have to say in response.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>ADJOURNMENT</title>
        <page.no>113</page.no>
        <type>ADJOURNMENT</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>New Vehicle Efficiency Standard, Electric Vehicles</title>
          <page.no>113</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
    <electorate>Riverina</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Scott Braid is one of the principal dealers of the long-established family firm Wagga Motors. I have known Scott for many years, and I knew his father. I have always respected this wonderful family company, a wonderful business that has put the wheels under so many people in the Riverina. Knowing Scott as I do, I know that it takes a bit to get him worked up. But let me tell you: he is worked up about the new vehicle efficiency standard and the push towards electric vehicles. He told me that he remembered when, a few years ago, the member for Cook said that a stringent EV push without accompanying infrastructure would kill people's long weekend, and he said that statement is relevant again. He went on to say: 'Moreover, one of the challenges is that EVs are not fit for purpose for most people, especially tradesmen. I'm not denying the need for a greener pathway, but the consumer—that is, those who vote—need a practical, convenient and financial reason to change. A financial stick isn't the answer, in my opinion. As I say, people want to hug trees, but they want to hug their wallet and lifestyle more.'</para>
<para>We really need to listen to the words of someone with the business acumen and experience of Mr Braid. He is really concerned. He sits on the Isuzu Ute Dealer Council, which is one brand that could be significantly impacted by this. They had a meeting recently. Whilst they won't disclose where they're going with this, they are alarmed by the expediency of this policy and the potential for all of their profit going in the first 12 months and then having to question their viability in the Australian marketplace.</para>
<para>Responding to a media release I put out, he said: 'It is really penalising regional based people more than metropolitan based people. I know the caravan world is up in arms as well, because it is pretty much hitting their target audience of people who get a four-wheel drive to go driving around the country. What about the boomers, who are all retiring? They all retire to travel around Australia in their caravans.' He quite correctly asks: 'Where does that leave them? This could well and truly put a handbrake on that, and then what does that do to their mental health?' That's a good question; it's a very relevant question. This is what they have pinned on their fridge. They're looking forward to it, and I'm not catastrophising too much to say it's going to scuttle those immediate plans. It's practical, everyday people such as Mr Braid who we should be thinking about and who the Minister for Climate Change and Energy should be listening to. Instead, as he so often does, the minister just talks down at these people, who are just worried about the practical realities for regional Australians of this push towards EVs and the new vehicle efficiency standard.</para>
<para>As I say, I put out a media release last week, 'Labor's car tax set to punish regional Australians'. I recommend you read it. The Albanese government has plans to jack up prices of Australia's most popular cars and utes as part of its proposed new vehicle efficiency standard and its push towards EVs. A lot has been made of the tradies and the utes, but it's also those people who want these vehicles for their family cars. Despite Australians facing a cost-of-living crisis, Labor has taken upon itself to recklessly pursue these standards, which will hike up the cost of brand-new cars and utes; there's no question. Whilst I appreciate that the minister in question time today talked about the US situation and how it didn't push prices up, we will remind him of that clip when they do push the prices up. Since coming to government, Labor has cost a worker earning $85,000 per year more than $7,600 in lost purchasing power, and now we've got this. People are worried. They're particularly worried in regional Australia where they have to drive more. They were the people who carried the economy through COVID, and they're the ones who are being whacked over and over and over again by this government.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bennelong Electorate: Lunar New Year</title>
          <page.no>114</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LAXALE</name>
    <name.id>299174</name.id>
    <electorate>Bennelong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to acknowledge the wonderful experiences that have happened in Bennelong over the last month as we celebrated both Australia Day and lunar new year. Saturday was the official end of the previous lunar new year, the year of the dragon. In Bennelong across our incredibly diverse community we held celebration after celebration, weekend after weekend, and our community really got into it. I want to take some time to acknowledge some of the events and some of the organisers that put so much effort into these celebrations. What struck me—I've been going to these for quite some time—is that each and every year that we gather either in January or February to celebrate lunar new year the celebration gets bigger and bigger. It's not just the Chinese Australian, Korean Australian and Vietnamese Australian communities that are gathering together and celebrating luna new year. It's everybody, and I think that's what's so fantastic about Bennelong and also the country we live in. It's become part of our culture to celebrate the culture of others.</para>
<para>Following was a really successful Australia Day in Bennelong—and congratulations to the city of Ryde and the city of Parramatta for their great events—we then flipped the switch and went straight into weeks of lunar new year celebrations. On 3 February in Eastwood, the multicultural heart of Bennelong, there were Chinese new year street stalls and celebrations with performances from traditional Chinese dragon and lion dancers. Red pockets were handed out to the people of Eastwood. And we had a lot of local councillors attending. We then went on to Rowe Street East in Koreatown where we had a new year street walk with traditional Korean drum dancers. We handed out blue packets in Koreatown, and we then brought both these communities together, along with our local business community, in the Eastwood town centre to celebrate and acknowledge a bumper start to the new year. As I said, we went from Australia Day celebrations straight into lunar new year celebrations, celebrating our diversity and bringing our community together.</para>
<para>On 4 February, I was lucky to be invited to the return of the dragon lunar new year event in Sydney's Chinatown—and a big shoutout to Johnny and the Lion Dance Kids for their exemplary dragon dance performance. They had a 12-metre-long dragon, one of the biggest they've ever performed with.</para>
<para>On 10 February, which was the actual lunar new year, our local Feng Hua Chinese School had a special celebration for lunar new year, and I was pleased to welcome the Minister for Education, the member for Blaxland, to give an address. It's such an important part of our multicultural society that young kids, in particular, can learn about the culture of their parents and grandparents.</para>
<para>Sixty-six per cent of people who live in Bennelong have both their parents born overseas, and being able to speak a second language is incredibly important to our community. The Feng Hua Chinese School not only teaches young Australian kids how to speak Mandarin but also teaches them some of the traditions of their friends and family. Minister Claire, the Minister for Education, had a wonderful time as we again celebrated lunar new year. That led straight into the Eastwood night markets, where we had a lion eye dotting ceremony, attended by councillors as well.</para>
<para>Then—it keeps on going!—on 11 February the Eastwood Chinese Senior Citizens Club held celebrations. The new president Joey Chan officiated. There was lion dancing. The god of wealth was there. There were performances by local schools and dance groups, and of course many street stalls. CASS, who have a home in West Ryde and do wonderful work in diverse communities in Bennelong, had their official ceremony on 16 February. And then, on 17 February, the City of Ryde held their massive lunar new year event, proudly supported by a grant from the Australia-Korea Foundation, administered through DFAT, with $15,000 going to a special Korea Town lunar new year lantern festival. It's been a bumper month. It's been great to be there.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Sunshine Coast: Rail</title>
          <page.no>115</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TED O'BRIEN</name>
    <name.id>138932</name.id>
    <electorate>Fairfax</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Only a couple of days ago the Queensland Labor Party leadership stood in front of cameras and celebrated what effectively is the halving of a rail project to Maroochydore for twice the price and despite the fact that they don't even have that project funded. It's only a Labor Party that is brazen enough to try to wrap up a failure and call it a victory.</para>
<para>There is a single project that should be the centrepiece of the 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games, and that is a passenger rail line connecting the Brisbane CBD with the Maroochydore CBD on the Sunshine Coast. This project has been under development for seven years. It was in 2017 that the then coalition government announced a faster rail project, with $20 million to be spread across only three business cases that would connect a region to a capital city. At that time it was crystal clear, because of the development on the Sunshine Coast, that we needed to get infrastructure ahead of the population curve.</para>
<para>I took the time then, due to that initiative of the coalition government, to meet with the Lord Mayor of Brisbane, to meet with the mayor of Moreton Bay, to meet with the mayor of the Sunshine Coast and also to meet with the mayor of Noosa to encourage them to put politics to one side and unite around the idea of connecting the Sunshine Coast coastal strip to Brisbane. I also met with the then Minister for Transport and Main Roads, Mark Bailey, and said to him, 'Let's put our politics to one side. This is good for South-East Queensland; let's work together.' And there was a unity ticket on that. I was able to put together a syndicate that then put on the table a compelling value proposition that won the day. It was one of three projects chosen that received $5 million from the federal government, with an expectation from the state of matching the funding, fifty-fifty.</para>
<para>But then Queensland Labor attempted to thwart the effort by refusing to contribute its $5 million. Instead it said, 'We'll give you some data and we'll engage. That's worth $5 million.' So we took that, on their honour, and we said, 'Alright. You're not going to put cash on the table. Let's get on with it.' Sure enough, we did a business case. The business case was well received. That business case, North Coast Connect, had the Queensland DTMR at the working level and at the governance level, using their methodology. When it got to Infrastructure Australia, Infrastructure Australia said, 'We're happy to put this on the priority list, but we need the Queensland government—they own the rail network—to be the proponent.' The Queensland government refused to do that, slowing the process yet again. Yet again Queensland Labor refused. Federal Labor were a complete waste of space. They never spoke up and never helped on this project whatsoever.</para>
<para>In came the bid for the 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games, and we unashamedly used that bid to put this project at the centre of transport infrastructure required. Labor eventually said, 'You know what? We understand the need for getting rail up to the Sunshine Coast, but we don't want to do this fast rail thing. We don't want fast rail. It needs to be the same signalling, the same rolling stock and, at the end of the day, the same network as Queensland Rail has today.' Based on that, I put a deal on the table and said, 'I tell you what. Let's do just that. Let's have a connection between Beerwah and Maroochydore, and we'll do those three conditions so long as it is designed in a way to accommodate fast rail in the future.' Eventually they said, 'That sounds good.' We got $1.6 billion. The member for Fisher and I confirmed $1.6 billion, 50 per cent of the project cost. What did Labor then do? 'Uh-oh. Don't know. We've got to think about it—back to the drawing board.' The Albanese government came in. They scrapped the fifty-fifty -partnership with the Queensland government for the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games and suddenly there was an over two-year delay. Now the price has gone up from $3.2 billion to get us to Maroochydore to $7 billion to only do one of three phases, only to Caloundra. Why Caloundra? The state government wants to retain the seat of Caloundra at the election. So here's the deal. They doubled the price and halved the length of the track. Then they turned around and said: 'Guess what? We don't even have enough money to do it.' But they're patting themselves on the back. Thanks, Labor, for nothing.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation</title>
          <page.no>116</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KHALIL</name>
    <name.id>101351</name.id>
    <electorate>Wills</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Most people pay their fair share of tax, so why should the biggest multinational companies get away with paying zero tax in Australia? One in three medium and large corporate entities paid zero tax in the last year. That's 841 out of 2,700 large and medium-sized corporate entities. In the mining, energy and water sector, more than half of companies paid no income tax. Let's just take a few examples. Chevron paid just $30 in tax. That's off revenue of $9.2 billion. In 2021, Google had an income of more than $7 billion but only paid $85 million in tax, an effective tax rate of only 1.2 per cent compared to the average tax per capita in Australia of nearly 30 per cent. Facebook doubled its profits but funnelled nearly $1 billion in local advertising revenue to an international subsidiary. Facebook Australia's tax bill was $24 million, an effective tax rate of 2.4 per cent. Just last year, Aristocrat made $1.67 billion and paid only $216 million in tax. That's an effective tax rate of 13.6 per cent. Eighty companies have paid zero tax in Australia for six straight years. It's remarkable.</para>
<para>The amount of corporate tax revenue lost annually due to multinationals minimising tax ranges from an estimated $5 billion to $6 billion. This is unacceptable. It's time they pay up. This is an issue I'm passionate about because every dollar lost through tax avoidance tactics is money lost to our kids' education, housing, health care, protecting our natural environment, looking after older Australians in their retirement, the NDIS and reducing the cost of child care. Australia needs to lead the way with tax avoidance legislation. I've been speaking on this issue for years on behalf of every worker, every small-business owner and every person in my community who is worse off because companies making huge profits in Australia using their armies of tax lawyers to avoid paying their fair share of tax.</para>
<para>The fact is that small businesses don't have the option to route their sales through Ireland, Singapore or the Cayman Islands. They don't have a subsidiary to which they can charge a licence fee to ensure they never turn a profit. They are stuck with paying their PAYG and quarterly BAS while the multinational companies play a shell game with their profits. If they're not paying, we are. If your average punter is paying their 32c in the dollar out of their salaries in tax, surely it's not too much to ask that some of the biggest companies in the world pay their fair share in Australia, a country where they are making a profit? If you'll allow me some poetic licence, if we are the villagers down on the ground, toiling away—the salary earner, the wage earner and the small-business owner—paying our fair share of tax, the multinationals are the dragons flying above us, swooping down to collect their gold and loot and winging it back to their tax haven lairs across the ocean. I've written about this. It's a very important issue. We need to be more ambitious on this reform.</para>
<para>I'm so pleased the Albanese government is taking concrete action through ambitious reform, including passing the Treasury Laws Amendment (Making Multinationals Pay Their Fair Share—Integrity and Transparency) Bill back in 2023, forcing the multinationals in Australia to operate with transparency and honesty, forcing them to disclose information about their subsidiaries in their financial reports and making sure that they're replacing their current asset tests and thin capitalisation rules with OECD recommended earning based tests. These are important measures for transparency and accountability.</para>
<para>This is a huge international issue. The biggest barrier we face is a lack of political courage, but the Labor government has the courage to take on these corporations and stop them shirking their obligations to the Australian people. There's more to do. This is just the start. Over the past decade, there have been a number of significant international attempts towards structural reform of the international tax system. President Biden has backed the OECD initiative of a global minimum tax to help nations recapture the estimated $130 billion to $300 billion in taxes that are lost every year through tax avoidance tactics.</para>
<para>Imagine what we could achieve as a global community with these additional billions spent on education, health care and the environment. Multinational dragons will likely lash out with their fire and smoke. We should not be afraid, because the whole world needs action on this. The unfairness cannot continue. We need to play our part, drawing on Australia's legacy of leading the way on significant international reforms. I would say that, if we can shackle those dragons, it will enable us to better fund essential public services well into the 21st century. Thanks to the actions of the Albanese Labor government, multinational companies are finally going to start paying their fair share of tax.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Forestry Industry</title>
          <page.no>116</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs MARINO</name>
    <name.id>HWP</name.id>
    <electorate>Forrest</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Australia has some of the best-managed sustainable forestry industries in the world, globally certified and operating under very strict regulations. In fact, the majority of our commercial forests are independently certified. Not only has the industry provided and supported thousands of Australian jobs, the majority of these are in regional communities. The native forest industry has ensured Australians have had access to locally produced, environmentally sound timber and timber products that are natural, sustainable, recyclable and renewable, operating almost exclusively in regrowth forests that have previously been harvested. I encourage people to visit the Wellington Discovery Forest in my electorate, which is a living example of sound silviculture and forestry management.</para>
<para>Trees capture the most carbon when they're in their early- to mid-growth phase, which is why the continuous harvest and replanting cycle of Australia's forestry operations delivers continuous carbon sequestration. Approximately half the dry mass of the wood is carbon, absorbed during the trees' growth and stored in timber products for life when they are turned into beautiful bespoke furniture or used for timber flooring, housing or construction. In all these forms, timber is recyclable as well.</para>
<para>What is critically important is that the industry regenerates and regrows every harvested area. Every tree used is maximised to reduce any waste and is replaced. For every tree harvested from certified plantations, at least one is replanted. This helps to minimise the amount of timber that we import from countries with forests that are at high risk of illegal logging and deforestation. In fact, the IPCC itself says that sustainably managing our forests for timber and wood products delivers the best climate change mitigation results.</para>
<para>In WA, less than one per cent of WA's total native forest area is harvested annually and is constantly replanted. We know that we have a serious and growing trade deficit of at least $2 billion in wood products. We are already a net importer of construction timber. In spite of this being the most sustainable renewable industry, the WA state Labor government made a political decision in 2021 to end sustainable hardwood harvesting. An FOI to WA's Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions showed there was no scientific data to justify this decision. It was, unfortunately, a political decision to destroy this industry. Clearly, WA's Labor government prefers to import timber from dodgy sources rather than use local, sustainable, recyclable and renewable timber produced by vibrant small and family businesses in regional communities just like my own.</para>
<para>The health of our forests is also an issue the government is ignoring in its failure to consider science or silviculture evidence. Silviculture, of course, is the science of controlling the composition, structure and dynamics of forests. It's applied by our experienced foresters to sustain and enhance the ecological outcomes while at the same time continually improving the productivity, vitality and diversity of forestry ecosystems. Sustainable harvesting of regrowth forest is in fact crucial to deliver ecological outcomes in our native forests. In 20 years or so, when the Labor politicians who've made this decision are long gone, the result will be greater fuel loads in our forests, resulting in hotter bushfires closer to our communities, putting more people at greater risk. There will be no more beautiful and no more beautiful jarrah, karri, marri or wandoo in magnificent artisan furniture or construction.</para>
<para>This decision has destroyed livelihoods and businesses in my electorate. Local people, communities and small and family business have been and are severely distressed. Shutting down this native harvesting means we're losing our forestry harvesters, who help with strategic firebreaks, who help protect our communities and forests and who are often first responders when bushfires happen and have the equipment and experience to do so.</para>
<para>As for the imported timber, do the labels on imported timber actually match the real country of origin? Has it been illegally logged and sourced? A year ago, the Labor minister was warned about imports of conflict timber from countries like Russia, which is processed in China and labelled with false details about its origins. Just prior to Christmas, the minister announced he'd awarded a contract to an entity to create a database to identify illegal timber. I've seen nothing on enforcement, nothing on border protection measures and nothing to deal with the dwindling domestic capacity that continues to shrink because of these decisions by Labor governments.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Freedom of Speech</title>
          <page.no>117</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LAWRENCE</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
    <electorate>Hasluck</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Democracy, the bedrock of this great country, relies on the informed choices of an engaged citizenry. Recently we have witnessed a troubling trend—an erosion of truth, a distortion of reality and an undermining of our institutions. Political rhetoric, once a tool for informed debate, is increasingly deployed as a weapon of deception. False narratives, misleading claims and divisive propaganda threaten the core principles that bind us together. Both by design and often inadvertently they undermine the fabric of a cohesive society. These practices are undertaken by those whose political fortunes feed on the misery of others and whose electoral successes rely not on the merits of their policies and vision for our country's future but on an electorate fearful of the latest fabricated evil and demonised other.</para>
<para>These practices are the daily bread of far-right groups and fringe parties but are now increasingly being utilised by the Liberal and National coalition. As soon as parliament returned for 2024, the opposition once again attacked the independence of the courts. They attacked the independence of not just any court but the High Court, the pinnacle of the judicial arm of government. They moreover persist in undermining national security by spreading misinformation in relation to the government's border security policies. Having given up on prosecuting the case for not providing income tax relief to working Australians during a period of increased pressure on household budgets, the opposition returned to what they, encouraged by their allies in the right-wing commentariat, believe to be their strength: the politics of fear. They don't mind if the truth gets in the way.</para>
<para>Politics is a contact sport. I get that and I'm willing to take as good as I give. However, when the opposition leader, in the pursuit of fuelling a political brawl and to give his cheerleaders and surrogates talking points, went on to what can only be described as an attack on the independence of the High Court, I am compelled to call it out. An attack on a fundamental pillar of the Westminster system, the separation of powers, is an uncomfortable warning sign that the fundamentals of our democracy are being eroded. For him to suggest that our government is somehow derelict in its duty by following the rulings made by an Australian court is absurd. It is a dangerous erosion of trust in the institution of the court. We have seen these attacks on the court further weaponised by Advance Australia in the Dunkley by-election. The Leader of the Opposition knowingly lit that fuse. It serves their immediate interests, and that is all they care about. Again, politics and campaigning can often be robust, but the language disseminated by Advance Australia, fuelled by the coalition, is beyond the pale.</para>
<para>There's more. At the end of the sitting week, I flew home to my electorate of Hasluck only to awaken Friday morning to another bout of divisive and inciteful rhetoric from the opposition leader, this time on the arrival of a boat on the remote north-west coastline of Western Australia. The opposition leader claimed that Labor had taken $600 million out of border protection. Wrong. That claim is at best an accounting trick. In Senate estimates, the head of the Australian Border Force, Michael Outram, stated that Border Force funding is currently the highest it's been since its establishment in 2015.</para>
<para>The member for Dickson also claimed that there had been a reduction in the amount of surveillance flights. Wrong. The reduction in surveillance flights is attributed to operational difficulties and underresourced air crews, not a policy or planned reduction. Senior officials of the Australian Border Force not only immediately corrected the record in relation to funding but reminded politicians that any suggestion that Operation Sovereign Borders's policies or practices had changed is incorrect, and those types of comments could be exploited by people smugglers looking to lure their next victims. From the fact that the record was corrected so swiftly by such senior officials, one can only deduce the possible severity of the consequences of such irresponsible rhetoric espoused by the Leader of the Opposition.</para>
<para>The danger is not only the spread of falsehoods in the present but the erosion of trust in the long term. When citizens can no longer rely on the information presented to them and when truth becomes elusive, the very essence of our democracy is at risk, unity falters and our shared values are overshadowed by the fog of misinformation. I would like to quote some advice from the Turkish journalist and author Ece Temelkuran. To Western societies, which tend to think their foundations are stronger than Turkiye's and that they are better able to resist right-wing populism, she warns:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The final takeover does not happen with one spectacular Reichstag conflagration, but is instead an excruciating, years-long process of many scattered, seemingly insignificant little fires that smolder without flames.</para></quote>
<para>House adjourned at 20:00</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>NOTICES</title>
        <page.no>118</page.no>
        <type>NOTICES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Presentation</title>
          <page.no>118</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1></debate>
  </chamber.xscript>
  <fedchamb.xscript>
    <business.start>
      <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:WX="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
        <p class="HPS-MCJobDate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-MCJobDate">
            <a href="Federation Chamber" type="">Monday, 26 February 2024</a>
          </span>
        </p>
        <p class="HPS-Normal" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-Normal">
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">The </span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">DEPUTY SPEAKER </span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">(</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">Mr Stevens</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">)</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">
            </span>took the chair at 10:30.</span>
        </p>
        <p class="HPS-Line" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-Line"> </span>
        </p>
      </body>
    </business.start>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS</title>
        <page.no>120</page.no>
        <type>CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Mirboo North: Storm</title>
          <page.no>120</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BROADBENT</name>
    <name.id>MT4</name.id>
    <electorate>Monash</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Without warning a horrific storm ran through the town of Mirboo North. Imagine a giant wall of steel being pushed through the bush and flattening everything in sight, tearing whole palm trees out of the ground and throwing them onto the next property. When I drove into Mirboo North I couldn't believe the damage. I'd been told about it, but I couldn't believe it. Entire forests had been flattened. They closed the pool. A young boy ran off home through the forest. The whole forest was flattened, but he was unhurt. This was miracle No. 1. Sadly, one farmer on a quad bike lost his life to flying debris. If you saw the town you'd have to say that there should have been 40, 50 or 60 people killed.</para>
<para>The town has responded magnificently. They have put together a volunteer coordination area at the RSL, which is being beautifully run. It's matching those offering help with those who need help. They're doing that on a voluntary basis, using paper, and it's working very well. The shire responded magnificently. I've got to say that the South Gippsland shire responded magnificently to the drama that unfolded, because it was a war zone—a war zone.</para>
<para>This was unprecedented weather that we had never experienced before. It was a conflagration of two storms, hitting one spot at one time, flying across the ridge and then down through the gullies. It went on for miles and miles. Hopefully everyone has their power back on now, but it took days and days to get that power back on. Luckily some people had realised their vulnerability and were prepared. They had candles. They had water. Some of them had cans of beer—very important.</para>
<para>To give you a sense of the extent of it, one fellow, Grant, took two days to cut his way out of the driveway of his property. It was only 30 metres long, and it took two days for him to cut his way out before he was able to get out of his property. There was no communication, because when the power went down the communication went down, so nobody could talk to anybody else at all. Nobody could say, 'I need help,' until help came to them. Trees had come down straight through the middle of houses, and no-one was killed. Two 80-year-olds had their house blown away from around them, and their roof fell in, and neither of them was hurt. Miracle after miracle after miracle—praise the Lord for the miracles.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cessnock City Council: Australia Day Awards</title>
          <page.no>120</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REPACHOLI</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My electorate is lucky to be filled with amazing people. Recently Cessnock City Council recognised just a few of the people who make our community such an amazing place to live. On Australia Day, Cessnock citizens of the year were announced. I want to recognise these important members of our community and thank them for helping to make the Hunter the best place in Australia.</para>
<para>Paul Goldman was recently announced as Cessnock Citizen of the Year. Paul has been devoted to our community of Cessnock for almost six decades. There is a long list of organisations that have been lucky enough to have had his involvement. Paul was a foundation member of the Cessnock mental health group and is a life committee member of St Patrick's Primary School. He has always sponsored local sporting groups and schools and supported charities, including Aspect Hunter School for Autism and HeartKids. Paul also started the well-known local business Goldman's Farm Pet Produce. Good on you, Paul. This award is well deserved.</para>
<para>Mark Bercini received the sports award. Mark is a real athlete and a proper community man. You can't talk about sport in the Greta-Branxton area without mentioning Mark. He has been involved with and played for Greta Branxton Colts Rugby League Club, Greta Branxton United Cricket Club, Greta Branxton Touch Football Association and the Branxton Golf Club. Congratulations, Mark.</para>
<para>The title of community event of the year went to Bellbird Mine Disaster centenary, which I was lucky enough to attend. It really was an amazing event and it served as a reminder of just how important mining is to our region. The day was well-organised and was the perfect way to pay our respects and remembrance to those impacted by this tragedy. Congratulations to all involved including Shane Thompson and Robin Williams from the mining and energy union; Lyn Hamer and Kim Weller from Coalfields Local Historical Association; and Lucy Flemming, Belinda Ward and Alexandria Carruthers from Coal Services.</para>
<para>The Richmond Vale Rail Trail supporters group took home the environment award. Well done to Terry Lewin, Sam Reich and Leigh Gibbens. There were also four community awards. Matilda Gibson and her sister Bronte Gibson were recognised for their hard work and fundraising for multiple charities including Ronald McDonald, Dance for Sick Kids and Swim for Sick Kids. Another recipient of the award was Nicky Ainley, who organised a community vigil in response to the tragic Greta bus crash, leading the coordination of community gatherings with support services available on site. Camilla Dorsch was involved in multiple community groups around the Wollombi area. Once again, congratulations to all the award winners and keep up the great work.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Griffith Electorate: Council Elections</title>
          <page.no>121</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHANDLER-MATHER</name>
    <name.id>300121</name.id>
    <electorate>Griffith</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>For more than three years the Greens and the local community in East Brisbane, Kangaroo Point and Woolloongabba have been standing up and fighting back against Labor and the LNP's plan to demolish and rebuild the Gabba stadium, and destroy an over 100-year-old public school, East Brisbane State School, and a beloved public park, Raymond Park. For years, we have been told that this was a done deal. When I asked the Prime Minister in parliament he got up and mocked the community, and suggested that Greens MPs would end up attending the Olympics at that stadium, rather than addressing the issue of demolishing the school and a public park. The former premier and now the new Premier both, on repeated occasions, said it was 'a done deal'. They said it was the best value for money—using billions of dollars of public money to demolish a school and a public park, all for an extra few thousand seats a few weeks of a sporting event in 10 years time.</para>
<para>What has happened since then? We have seen countless rallies, enormous pressure. We saw the federal government quietly decline to fund the Gabba component of the stadium, isolating the state government. Then we saw the LNP council all of a sudden change their minds and declare, 'No, we're not so sure about this project,' and now the state government are not so sure either; although, rather than coming out and scrapping the project they have announced a review that will not report back for two to three days after the council election, which seems oddly convenient.</para>
<para>What we know is the only reason we got to this point is because of the Greens and local community pressure. If it were not for us collectively standing up and fighting back we would have definitely lost a beloved public school and public park. Instead, what we have seen is pressure working, forcing the federal government to back down from funding it, forcing the LNP council to pretend they never supported the project in the first place when they did, and now forcing the state government to announce this review, which, again, will only report back two to three days after the council election.</para>
<para>The bottom line is, when it comes to this council election, what they are trying to do is avoid scrutiny. But what we know is that the message this community needs to send to the Labor and Liberal parties is 'never again'. On council election night they need to see massive swings against them—they need to lose seats—knowing full well that this is the consequence of trying to bulldoze a local community. Those same strategists in the Labor and Liberal parties need to know that next time they think about using public money to destroy our schools and public parks they remember nights like that council election night.</para>
<para>If you are opposed to the Gabba stadium demolition, if you do want to make sure that the state government scraps it and instead spends billions of dollars building public housing and public schools then vote Greens on council election night this March.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Edwards, Mr Thomas Haddon</title>
          <page.no>121</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr NEUMANN</name>
    <name.id>HVO</name.id>
    <electorate>Blair</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Ipswich is in mourning with the recent passing of its most respected business leader Thomas Haddon Edwards at the age of 87. Tom was the owner of prominent electrical store and family business RT Edwards and Sons, which was a household name for decades. The firm was founded by Tom's father, Roy, who went into the ministry. He started the door-to-door electrical repair business during the 1930s Depression before selling electrical goods and opening the original RT Edwards store in the Ipswich CBD.</para>
<para>Educated at Ipswich Grammar School, Tom was a talented sportsman. He completed national service and an electrical apprenticeship in the family business. Tom went on to become general manager of the business, building it up to a chain of more than a dozen stores across Queensland and interstate, employing more than 300 staff. He took over the business at the age of 19 years. RT Edwards would go on to become the largest shareholder in the former Retravision group.</para>
<para>Tom was always focused on his customers. Further, he made every effort to know his staff and believed they were his greatest business asset. Tom was a great communitarian and received an OAM for his service to the local community. He served at Raceview Congregational Church in many capacities, including as life deacon. He was a true Christian—faith, hope and love were exemplified in Tom. He was a member of Ipswich Rotary for 55 years, a member of the chamber of commerce and a two-time winner of the chamber's Business Person of the Year Award. He was often co-opted to help local committees and projects such as appointments to the St Andrews hospital board, the Salvation Army advisory committee and so many others.</para>
<para>Tom's older brother was a former Liberal state member for Ipswich, Queensland Deputy Premier and Queensland Treasurer, the late Sir Llew Edwards. His grandson, Sam O'Connor, is the current state LNP member for the Gold Coast seat of Bonney.</para>
<para>On Friday I attended Tom's funeral at his beloved Raceview Congregational Church, which was a wonderful celebration of his very full life. It was an honour to be there. My family has known the Edwards family in Ipswich for generations. In the eulogy for his father, Tom's son Gary, a good friend of mine, best summed up his dad is this way: 'He was a capable, relational, outstanding businessmen, a true gentleman and a generous man who had a passion to serve others and show his faith in practical ways.'</para>
<para>Tom is survived by his wife of 64 years, Ivy, who he loved so dearly; his four children, Gary, Suzanne, Paul, Anne-Maree and their partners; nine grandchildren; and five great-grandchildren. My sincere condolences to his whole extended family and his many friends. Vale, Tom Edwards, and thank you for your service to Ipswich, the life you lived and the example you set for so many.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Kurz, Mr Merv</title>
          <page.no>122</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUCHHOLZ</name>
    <name.id>230531</name.id>
    <electorate>Wright</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to inform the House of an extraordinary individual, Merv Kurz from Springbrook. I offer his name into the <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline> for the extraordinary contribution he's made over five decades to that community. I recently attended a community event in Springbrook where we celebrated Merv's 87 years of life, but we also recognised his 55-year commitment to the Springbrook community as their dedicated contract postman. For over five decades, Merv has exemplified the essence of community service, demonstrating a genuine concern for the welfare of others. Imagine delivering mail day in, day out, facing road closures, blackouts, potholes that could swallow his entire van at times, barking dogs, obscured letterboxes and badly addressed envelopes. Despite these challenges, Merv not only has weathered the storms and bushfires but has done so with genuine smile on his face. At Christmas, he works tirelessly delivering seven days a week because, in his eyes, the mail just has to be delivered.</para>
<para>Merv's tenure in the community has seen him serve as a bulldozer driver, timber cutter, bus driver and trip manager. Merv's diverse contributions made him an integral part of the fabric of Springbrook. He was instrumental in establishing the rural fire brigade, ensuring the safety and wellbeing of others in the community. Throughout daily interactions and genuine care, he has fostered unity amongst the residents. Merv attends all Anzac Day services in his father's World War II jeep, carrying the veterans and locals who can't walk in the march any longer. His presence not only is symbolic but represents the commitment to shared values that binds us all together.</para>
<para>I was told while I was up there recently that locals will often time their home duties to coincide with a break to chat with Merv and that many preschool children eagerly await the moment they will receive mail from the beloved postie. Merv has inspired others to contribute to the community, creating a legacy that will be remembered and cherished for future generations. Merv takes pride in handing over the reins to his teenage grandkids. Get this: as a team, one, Ella, is on their P plates, and the other one is Caylan, who is 15. So the bloke who's 15 puts the mail in the letterbox while Ella, with the P plates, delivers the mail for the community. On behalf of the Springbrook community I express our deepest gratitude to Merv Kurz. for his tireless service.</para>
<para>Pauline Duece, who made some biscuits for us up there, got to her feet during the ceremony, saying that young Caylan has to remember her name. She told the community that Caylan thought her name was 'Where's my biscuits?' because every time he drives up the driveway he says, 'Here's your mail, where's my biscuits?'! <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Western Australia: Lunar New Year</title>
          <page.no>122</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LIM</name>
    <name.id>300130</name.id>
    <electorate>Tangney</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Lunar New Year celebrations have just passed in my home state of Western Australia, ushering in the Year of the Dragon, and they have been nothing short of amazing. We are so lucky to have the Albanese Labor government, and I speak on behalf of the Chinese community in Western Australia about the honour of hosting the Prime Minister at the Western Australian Chinese New Year Ball. To witness the Prime Minister; state premiers of Western Australia, past and present; and many ministers standing side-by-side in embracing the rich culture of the Western Australian Chinese community was a sight to behold. The feedback from many of my constituents who were also in attendance affirmed the Prime Minister's reputation as a leader who is inclusive, progressive and genuinely caring. Lunar New Year is not just a cultural event; it is a time honoured tradition that symbolises new beginnings, renewal and progress. This event was particularly significant for the Chinese community in Western Australia, as it marks the first time in over three decades that a prime minister has graced the Western Australian Chinese community with their presence during Lunar New Year festivities.</para>
<para>I was particularly touched by the Prime Minister's decision to accept the invitation extended by the Western Australian Chinese community during his last visit to my electorate of Tangney last year. It speaks volumes about the progress we have made as a nation and what truly makes us Australians. The countless contributions the Chinese community has made in Western Australia for over a century are not unrecognised or underappreciated by this government.</para>
<para>This colourful celebration truly embraced our multiculturalism here in Australia, transcending cultural boundaries and inviting everyone to partake in the joy of a new year. To have the Prime Minister there with us that evening was a reminder that, as leaders, we have a responsibility to foster an environment where every individual feels seen, heard and valued. May we continue to build Australia as a country where diversity is celebrated, where opportunity knows no bounds and where every Australian can feel proud to call this great land home.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fadden Electorate</title>
          <page.no>123</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CALDWELL</name>
    <name.id>306489</name.id>
    <electorate>Fadden</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Since we were last in Canberra, I've enjoyed hosting some of my colleagues in the electorate of Fadden. I recently had the opportunity to have the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, the member for Farrer, join me at the Gold Coast City Marina & Shipyard. I felt it was important for the deputy leader to see firsthand the thriving hub of commerce that Pat and Trenton Gay and their family business has developed in the northern Gold Coast. Located on the banks of the Coomera River in Coomera, the Gold Coast city marina is one of the most awarded shipyards and marinas in Australia. The Gay family's vision to create a one-stop shop has been achieved, with over 90 businesses partners and tenants co-existing within the facility. The Gold Coast city marina is an epicentre of manufacturing; boatbuilding; antifouling; IT and communications; detailing; electronics; engineering; hydraulics; welding; upholstery; logistics and more. Not only is the marine industry vital to a thriving Gold Coast economy but the Gold Coast city marina also highlights the capability in our local talent—ready to take on the world with bigger and more innovative projects, including the construction of a new drone vessel that will be on display in Canberra in coming months. In meeting with the chief operating officer, Andrew Chapman, the deputy leader was informed that the Gold Coast City Marina & Shipyard and the nearby Boat Works, run by the Longhurst family, are key pillars in delivering almost 5,000 jobs in the Gold Coast marine industry. I'm very grateful to the deputy leader for making time to meet some of the small and family businesses in Coomera, as we are the small-business capital of Australia.</para>
<para>I also hosted the shadow minister for regional development and local government, the member for Gippsland—who is here in the chamber today; welcome—for a roundtable with our city leaders. Among the attendees were the acting council CEO, Paul Callander, and five councillors whose divisions overlap with my electorate: Councillor Mark Hammel, Councillor Donna Gates, Councillor William Owen-Jones, Councillor Shelley Curtis and Councillor Brooke Patterson. The key theme of our discussion was how the federal government could do more to work collaboratively and seamlessly with the City of Gold Coast to deliver for our constituents. We reflected on the Christmas Day storms and our collaboration with the Minister for Emergency Management; opportunities for improvement in delivering critical infrastructure; legal support services; and arts and culture. Under the previous coalition government, we saw critical funding delivered through an array of successful initiatives, including the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program, which this Albanese Labor government has, unfortunately, decided to abandon.</para>
<para>The shadow minister and I also attended the student leadership ceremony at Arundel State School and caught up with the executive team at the Runaway Bay Bayhawks soccer club. The leadership team were showing us their new field lighting, which has been built since they received a grant of $500,000 from the former coalition government. Thank you to both shadows for visiting Fadden.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Mould</title>
          <page.no>123</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr REID</name>
    <name.id>300126</name.id>
    <electorate>Robertson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The presence of mould in dwellings throughout Australia is a significant health issue. On the Central Coast, it is an escalating problem affecting many people, particularly those living in social housing and rental properties. In New South Wales, there are businesses involved with the removal of mould and the remediation of properties that are affected by it. Concerningly, there is minimal regulation that specifies the correct removal of mould and remediation of properties that are affected by this health hazard. This is leading to several businesses performing ineffective and inadequate mould removal and remediation services for property owners and their tenants. This omission of policy is impacting the lives of thousands of people across New South Wales, including in my home electorate of Robertson.</para>
<para>I recently met with Gaelle Pincemin and Camilla Thompson from MouldSafe, an extraordinary organisation helping people impacted by mould. They educated me on the correct processes to effectively remove mould and remediate properties. Unfortunately, we have a range of cowboy companies that do not remove mould or remediate properties effectively, which results in the mould growing back faster and in a worse state.</para>
<para>Gaelle and Camilla informed me about an experience they had with a real estate agent who was not prepared to undertake the appropriate work to remove mould affecting a property on the Central Coast. The mould had infiltrated the property to such a degree of severity that it caused a newborn baby to be hospitalised and the property to be assessed as uninhabitable. Gaelle and Camilla assessed the property and let the agent know that, first and foremost, the property required remediation once the leaking tap was fixed. The water from this tap had seeped through two floors of the property, causing ideal conditions for that mould to grow. Additionally, the property then required effective mould removal, which included using state-of-the-art mechanical equipment. Following this process, a wash and wipe-down with an antimicrobial solution was to be performed. The agent chose to ignore Gaelle and Camilla's professional advice and opted for a cheap $700 service from a cowboy company. This left the property susceptible to mould regrowing, jeopardising the health of the tenants again.</para>
<para>Following on from my meeting with MouldSafe, Gaelle and Camilla are calling for much-needed regulations to be implemented to better protect tenants and property owners from the effects of mould. They are calling for regulations that stipulate health and safety standards for the mould removal sector, quality control to make sure effective work is being done, hardship supports for vulnerable people, proper environmental disposal processes, training and certification of businesses, and process standardisation across the sector. I've made these representations on behalf of MouldSafe to the New South Wales government, and I look forward to its response on this developing issue. I thank Gaelle Pincemin and Camilla Thompson for their advocacy and work in this area.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Defence Force</title>
          <page.no>124</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHESTER</name>
    <name.id>IPZ</name.id>
    <electorate>Gippsland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today we have around 90,000 Australian men and women who put on the uniform of our Navy, Army and Air Force and are prepared to place themselves in harm's way to help those who can't necessarily help themselves. I respect the fact that those part-time and full-time service men and women do an incredible job on behalf of our nation to keep us safe and respond to humanitarian aid and disaster relief requests throughout the world.</para>
<para>It is a world-class Defence Force that we have, and the competitive edge of that Defence Force is not the equipment or the weapons; it's the people themselves and the values, the character, the integrity and the culture of excellence that they have in their service to our nation. As a grateful nation, we owe them the opportunity to train well, to deploy well and to be supported in their service. Also, when the time comes, we owe it to them and their families to help them transition well and make a great contribution to civic life in our nation.</para>
<para>So I was alarmed, disappointed and concerned by the complete lack of respect evident in the Minister for Defence's comments in relation to our Defence Force. I'm also concerned about the impact of those comments on the morale of our serving men and women, particularly at a time when we're trying to secure more of our best and brightest young Australians to serve in the Defence Force. The minister said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I think there are issues of culture within the senior leadership and the more general leadership of the ADF and the department which needs challenging.</para></quote>
<para>He went on to say:</para>
<quote><para class="block">There is an issue in relation to culture, and we should be seeking to have a culture of absolute excellence, and that is the point that I've made.</para></quote>
<para>He goes on again:</para>
<quote><para class="block">There is a way to go before we have that culture of excellence in the Department of Defence and in the Australian Defence Force.</para></quote>
<para>In this place, words are our weapon of choice. But the men and women of the Defence Force don't have that luxury. They can face real hardship and real threats in their day-to-day work. I challenge the minister to explain his comments. Exactly what does he mean when he says there is a 'culture of excellence' problem in the Australian Defence Force? I have travelled extensively around Australia and around the world, and have had the great fortune to see our men and women of the Australian Defence Force in action, in training and on deployment—and I have witnessed excellence in action on many, many occasions. Many of the finest Australians I've ever met are the men and women in uniform in the Navy, in the Army and in the Air Force, and they are highly regarded by all other coalition nations and the people they serve alongside. I stand with them and respect them. I don't stand with the minister, who weaponises his words to undermine their service to our nation.</para>
<para>On this side of the House, we respect our Australian Defence Force personnel and the job they do. The men and women in uniform have earnt that respect. They have our eternal gratitude, and I thank them all for their service to our nation.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Hotham Electorate: Hotham Community Spirit and Leadership Awards</title>
          <page.no>124</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms O'NEIL</name>
    <name.id>140590</name.id>
    <electorate>Hotham</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's wonderful to be on my feet in the parliament today talking about some of the incredible work that is being done by young leaders across my electorate of Hotham. We all, as members of parliament, have lots of different aspects to our jobs, but one of my absolute favourites is speaking with local school students in my beautiful corner of south-east Melbourne. They are doing some absolutely extraordinary things, and I want to speak about some of those examples today.</para>
<para>Like many members of parliament, I do a big community spirit and leadership award ceremony at the end of the year. Late last year we held that at Wellington Secondary College in Mulgrave. I want to mention Conor, who received an award from Springvale Park Special Developmental School recognising his participation and incredible drive to build positive friendships with his classmates. Madina from Noble Park Secondary College is one of their vice-captains and she perfectly represents the motto 'Our Best Always'. Zakeem from Wellington Secondary College did—get this!—3,000 push-ups and also coordinated his school in the 2023 push-up challenge for mental health. Nathan from Westall Primary School was school captain last year and demonstrated beautiful school values. We had another student who did something which was totally incredible to me: shaved their head, donated their hair and raised money for kids with cancer. Another student fundraised for the Royal Children's Hospital. We had members of local government youth advisory committees, we had captains and we had volunteers.</para>
<para>We deal with a lot of dark topics in the work that we do in this parliament. We're talking a lot about risk and threats, but let's not forget our beautiful country is in safe hands with these wonderful young people. They are motivated, they are absolutely patriotic and they are devoted to their country. I want to thank all of them for their efforts. I also met recently with Jack, Ava, Lily and Lulu, who are the sustainability leaders at the St Peter's primary school in East Bentleigh. I had a wonderful time with them, where they showed me very proudly the trees that they planted through the Queen's Jubilee Program, which I was able to support in my role as the member for Hotham.</para>
<para>I see also in my electorate incredible leadership in academics. I want to mention James Johnson from the Hotham electorate, who won a gold medal at the International Science Olympiads—so totally incredible. I also had two local students who were selected for the Curious Minds STEM program. I wanted to also mention that I visited Heatherhill Primary School in Springvale, one of my most loved primary schools in my electorate, and I gave leadership badges. I met one of the mums, whose daughter received a badge, and her older daughter also received a community spirit and leadership award. This hopefully gives you a sense of the enormously important and beautiful work these young people are doing in my electorate. I want to thank each and every one of them. It's a privilege to represent you in federal parliament.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>176304</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>In accordance with standing order 193, the time for members' constituency statements has concluded.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</title>
        <page.no>125</page.no>
        <type>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Lobbyists</title>
          <page.no>125</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr RYAN</name>
    <name.id>297660</name.id>
    <electorate>Kooyong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) acknowledges that public perceptions of the pervasive influence that lobbyists have over political decision-making have worsened in recent years;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) recognises that there is presently no consistent or visible way of knowing which corporate or stakeholder groups are meeting with Government Ministers;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) commits to the:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) timely publication of ministerial diaries as a vital transparency and accountability measure;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) maintenance and publication of a searchable register that includes the names of all lobbyists accessing this building, and that those persons be identified as a professional lobbyist, an in-house lobbyist and/or a former Government representative; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) transparency of meetings held by those individuals with Members of Parliament; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) agrees to extend the post-employment cooling-off period for former Ministers and senior government officials to three years, in keeping with international best practice.</para></quote>
<para>As Senator John Faulkner said in 2012:</para>
<quote><para class="block">No-one ever argues that governments should have less integrity, that elected officials should not be accountable, or that public servants should behave unethically.</para></quote>
<para>'Broad statements regarding the value of integrity, transparency, accountability and ethics gain agreement from all sides of politics and society.' The thing is that ensuring and enforcing government integrity demands more than just expressions of goodwill. The recent rise in this country of post-truth corrosive Trumpian politics of the far right, which is actively seeding division in our politics, demands of all of us a more muscular democracy. The Australian public has, with good cause, developed great cynicism around politicians and our motivations and actions. That cynicism is corrosive of democracy. It undermines our social licence in this place. It calls into question what we do here and why we do it. Australians need to be able to trust their elected officials. Political integrity is critical to maintaining that trust. Loss of that trust means that we lose the ability to inspire our nation, to make difficult decisions, to be brave, to be bold, to be generous, to legislate to protect the vulnerable and to combat current and intergenerational inequities.</para>
<para>In recent years, we've seen the effect of the loss of that trust in our ability to effectively lead reform of our tax system, to improve affordability of housing, to talk about fairness in our education, in health care, in aged-care sectors, to treat refugees humanely and to act effectively on reconciliation. We've lost the ability to tell the truth to the public and to be believed. To restore the public's faith in our parliamentary and political integrity, we have to put into place the processes, the checks and the safeguards required to demonstrate transparency and accountability to the public's satisfaction. An effective integrity framework demands regulation of lobbying.</para>
<para>I've lodged to this House a private member's bill which was developed with the help of several peak integrity and transparency organisations. The bill includes a provision for a new transparent online lobbyist register, which will include in-house lobbyists as well as third-party lobbyists. It will require lobbyists to lodge transparent quarterly returns. It will legislate publication of ministerial diaries so that we can note in real time who ministers deal with and why. It will impose a longer cooling-off period to ensure that ministers and senior public servants don't work as lobbyists immediately after leaving parliament. It will be enforceable with fines and bans for lobbyists who are in breach of the bill. It will replace the currently existing code of conduct, which is limited, inadequate and unenforced. It's actually worse than nothing because it hides the problem rather than addressing it.</para>
<para>My bill should be debated, and it should be passed by this House. The government's and the opposition's attitudes to it will reflect how they really feel about addressing integrity and transparency in this place. The bill should sit within a broader framework, which should also include action on ministerial standards, political donations, truth in political advertising and an end to pork-barrelling. The establishment of the National Anti-Corruption Commission was a major achievement which was due, in no small part, to the tireless efforts of my crossbench colleagues. But we need more of those achievements. Public interest disclosure—whistleblowing—is still a fraught area in this country. We desperately need a comprehensive overhaul of the Public Interest Disclosure Act and we need a whistleblower protection commission which has comprehensive jurisdiction over both the public and the private sectors.</para>
<para>It is time to shine a light into the halls of this parliament. As politicians we are judged not only on our words but also on our actions. So I challenge the government and the opposition to support me and my colleagues—the other members of the crossbench—in pushing for better regulation of lobbying and for greater integrity and transparency from our government and in pushing for a return to a form of government in which Australians, our constituents, can believe in.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>176304</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Dr Haines</name>
    <name.id>282335</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms THWAITES</name>
    <name.id>282212</name.id>
    <electorate>Jagajaga</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thanks to the member for Kooyong for raising this motion. She and I represent neighbouring electorates, and I know both of our communities care very deeply about matters of integrity in politics. I know that, for many people in Jagajaga, integrity was one of the big issues that they raised with me, particularly during the course of the last term of the last government and during the last election campaign.</para>
<para>They did see what was unfolding in this place under the leadership of the then Prime Minister, the member for Cook. They did see the sports rorts, which affected groups in my community, where the Liberals and Nationals oversaw funding going towards projects to the detriment of other projects, in communities like mine, that were high-quality proposals. They saw the airport rort where the Morrison government reportedly paid 10 times the actual value of land for the Western Sydney airport, which cost $30 million. I could go on, but I won't. It wasn't until the election of our government that we also realised that the member for Cook had multiple secret ministries.</para>
<para>The member for Kooyong is right. This type of behaviour does undermine trust in the work of this place and, more broadly, trust in our democratic institutions. It's something we all have to guard against. I think that the attention that our government has brought to that, since we came into office, is a marked difference from what we saw from those in office previously.</para>
<para>It did take a change of government, a Labor government, to introduce a national anti-corruption commission and have that commission delivered. It is a change that, absolutely, Australians had been calling for. I also acknowledge the strong advocacy and work of the member for Indi in establishing the National Anti-Corruption Commission—a strong, independent watchdog. In the few short months since it commenced operations the commission has worked widely across the federal public sector to ensure that people are aware of its work and its areas of focus, including the corruption risks in procurement, recruitment and promotion.</para>
<para>The commission has also said that this year it will be focusing on efforts of conflicts of interest, ethical decision-making and electoral issues. Given the interest in the work of the NACC, it's also worth highlighting the protections that the NACC includes for whistleblowers. Anyone who makes a referral, provides information or gives evidence about a corruption issue is protected from civil, criminal or administrative liability, including defamation proceedings, except for situations where it relates to their own conduct. There are many elements to the work of the NACC, and more broadly, that are happening to strengthen integrity in this place and the federal political sphere. The introduction of the National Anti-Corruption Commission is, in fact, one of the most significant reforms in decades and one that I know that my community is very pleased to see delivered.</para>
<para>Lobbying reform as an issue is one that has been raised by many civil society organisations and was raised, for me, during part of my work during the inquiry into the 2022 federal election that I led as chair of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters. While lobbying was beyond the work and the scope of that committee, I acknowledge the concerns that have been raised. It is important, as I said, that this parliament works to ensure that we don't see a loss of trust in this place or, more broadly, in the democratic institutions that do make our democracy as strong and unique as it is. That is why, through our JSCEM inquiry, we have made several recommendations focused on strengthening transparency and trust in our electoral system, including real-time disclosure of donations, lowering the donation disclosure threshold, caps on donations and spending, and many more. They are important reforms and they do go to these issues of transparency, trust and how we want to see our democracy operate.</para>
<para>Of course, it was under the Rudd-Gillard government that the Lobbying Code of Conduct was introduced. That meant that, for the first time in this place's history lobbyists meeting with government representatives needed to register their activities and ensure compliance with strict transparency rules. The code requires government representatives to meet only with registered lobbyists, and it places requirements on lobbyists to report breaches of the code, to register and to comply with the principles outlined by the code.</para>
<para>I know that many Australians, including people in my community, are deeply interested in integrity in politics. It is an issue that matters. The National Anti-Corruption Commission was a big step forward and a major reform that was well overdue. There is more work to do, and I look forward to continuing to engage in the broad discussions we have about that in this place and working with others to continue to enhance integrity.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr HAINES</name>
    <name.id>282335</name.id>
    <electorate>Indi</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm proud today to stand and second the motion from the member for Kooyong because, like me, the member for Kooyong is clear. Every time she stands in this place, she is representing the people of Kooyong who elected her. And, as an Independent MP, I am confident that, every time I speak in this place, every time I vote and every time I make a decision, I know who I represent. It's not the party bosses or big businesses or unions; it's the people of Indi.</para>
<para>But too often in this place questions are raised over the decisions made and positions taken by those in power. Whose interests are being represented and who stands to gain? The answers to these questions—who is represented and who stands to gain—are too often found in who has access, who knows the right people or who paid for the right seat at a dinner, when instead it should be the people who elect their representatives and send them here to Parliament House to do exactly that—represent their interests.</para>
<para>We are, of course, talking about the practice of lobbying and the distortionary effect it can have on the decisions made here. Lobbying itself is not the problem. Advocacy is a vital part of our democracy. We need different points of view, different experiences and new ideas. We need diverse voices to be heard in order to make the best decisions and develop the best and most robust policies. The problem is that not all voices have equal access to decision-makers and to elected representatives. In fact, it's clear there's a significant imbalance in who gets access to members of this place. With easier access comes easier influence and a smoother way to make one's case more often at the critical moments.</para>
<para>You may ask: why is this a problem? We know alcohol industry lobbying delayed implementation of mandatory pregnancy warning labels for more than a decade in Australia. We know from the data collected under the Queensland government's lobbying registers and analysed by the Grattan Institute that highly regulated industries dominate donations, commercial lobbying contracts and meetings with senior ministers. We also know from that data that the gambling and property development sectors are overrepresented in their share of external donations, lobbying contracts and meetings with ministers compared to their economic contribution. It is the industries with the most to lose from government regulation that are knocking on the doors more often and saying, 'Don't worry about us; you don't need that law', even when the evidence says, 'Yes, we do actually need that law.'</para>
<para>There is too much we don't know about how lobbying works in Australia. Yes, we have a lobbying register, but it only covers third-party lobbyists who are contracted by outside companies to open doors. It doesn't cover in-house lobbyists, often labelled 'government relations officers'. Lobbyists stroll the halls of this building easily through building passes sponsored by parliamentarians, but there's no way for the public to know who these people are and which MPs have sponsored them to have this access. We don't know who meets with ministers or how often they do so. We don't know who is going through the revolving door between MPs' offices and lobbying jobs. Getting to know how big the problem is is the first step towards solving it.</para>
<para>This motion once again shows how important it is to have a strong crossbench in this place. It's the Independent members who are working to increase transparency and accountability and improve integrity in this place. As I've already said once today and, no doubt, will say many more times again, sunlight is the best disinfectant. We know many members of this place are confident enough to take meetings with, for example, the tobacco lobby, the alcohol lobby or the gambling lobby because they can do so without publicity. How many of these meetings would happen if ministers knew their diaries would be made public?</para>
<para>Addressing the imbalance created by lobbying isn't just about transparency. It's about members of this place asking: who doesn't have a voice here? We must commit to transparency, to accountability and to seeking out the voices that generally find it harder to make themselves heard—those who are disadvantaged and vulnerable, not just those who have deep pockets and know which doors to open.</para>
<para>Yes, this government has done good work in establishing the National Anti-Corruption Commission, a formidable and important reform to integrity in this nation. But that's not the end of the story. There's so much more to do. This government needs to step up to the plate on many measures of integrity, and this issue of lobbyists and access to power must be addressed. We must have fairness in access to decision-makers. We must make sure that those with power don't have the greatest propensity to exercise it when it comes to elected members, ministers and decisions of this parliament.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DAVID SMITH</name>
    <name.id>276714</name.id>
    <electorate>Bean</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak to the motion moved by the member for Kooyong and recognise other contributions to this debate. As someone who worked in and around government for 20 years, I recognise the member's advocacy for more transparency in government and, in principle, support much of the thrust of this motion. It's critical, though, to acknowledge that this government has already made significant changes, including the establishment of a National Anti-Corruption Commission and the introduction of overdue reforms to public-interest disclosures, with more reform on its way. We have strengthened codes of conduct that apply to ministers and their offices. It's a stark contrast to the previous government. The Albanese government is committed to upholding a high standard of integrity, transparency and accountability—a standard the former government never aspired to, let alone achieved.</para>
<para>Indeed, as previous speakers have noted, the original Lobbying Code of Conduct was created by the last Labor government. When the code was established, for the first time lobbyists were required to register their activity and comply with strict rules on transparency. It was one of the many integrity measures introduced by the Rudd Labor government, which also included a new code of conduct for ministerial staff and a strengthened ministerial code. When a third-party lobbyist contacts a government representative, including a minister, the code requires that they confirm they are on the register and disclose whose interests they are representing. The code is practical, making it easier to adhere to and therefore more effective. The code also imposes an obligation on government representatives: they must not knowingly be a party to lobbying by third-party lobbyists not on the register. There are penalties associated with failure to comply with the code, including a power for the Secretary of the Attorney-General's Department to bar a lobbyist who has committed a serious breach. The current code recognises the rights of lobbyists to lobby but places conditions on the manner of third-party lobbying through mandatory registration and disclosure obligations. I acknowledge that not everyone is happy with the scope of the lobbying code, and I acknowledge the argument that the scope of the existing register should extend to in-house lobbyists in particular. I think there's merit in considering this approach. Indeed, some might suggest it's a way of closing a loophole.</para>
<para>I recognise that this motion also calls for automatic access to the ministerial diaries. Such access to diaries would be unknown to the Commonwealth's freedom of information system as it currently stands, as it does not provide for the automatic publication of any category of document. Access to official documents of government is available under the Freedom of Information Act by request. Each request is subject to assessment which is governed by statutory requirements and by a series of exemptions, each of which needs to be considered. But it is critical that assessment of these requests should occur in a timely way, and I acknowledge the concerns about timeliness often.</para>
<para>I note also the motion's suggestion to extend the post-employment cooling-off period for ministers and senior government officials to three years. From my experience working with government prior to politics, I agree that we need to obtain the right balance between post-political careers and public responsibility. For example, Canada's Lobbying Act prohibits not only ministers but also their staff and senior public servants from undertaking a broad range of activities for five years after they've left office. This includes communicating with any public office holder or senior public servant in relation to their official duties and arranging for other people to do so. This is a much stronger approach than the current Australian approach. Some gaps still remain in our system, including a time period that can sometimes be avoided by warehousing ex-officials on other duties.</para>
<para>In looking around the world at the state that many great democracies are finding themselves in and contemplating the challenges for our country that are looming on the horizon and creeping ever close to us, there are few tasks more important than restoring trust in and the capacity of government. The Albanese government is committed to integrity, honesty and accountability in government. Within months of coming to office we established the National Anti-Corruption Commission, the single biggest reform to the integrity framework in decades. The commission commenced operation on 1 July 2023—a major reform of the current Labor government.</para>
<para>This government, like the member for Kooyong, was elected to make our government and public service more transparent and accountable and to strengthen their integrity. We've already made significant progress, but we recognise that there is still more work to be done.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>176304</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for next sitting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Multiculturalism</title>
          <page.no>129</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LAXALE</name>
    <name.id>299174</name.id>
    <electorate>Bennelong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) acknowledges:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the work the Government has undertaken to support Australia's multicultural communities, including:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) launching the Multicultural Framework Review;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) supporting a cohesive and inclusive multicultural society;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iii) investing $20 million in the Adult Migrant English Program;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iv) extending the Community Language Schools grant program to pre-schoolers;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(v) committing $7.5 million to fund the Australian Human Rights Commission to complete its National Anti-Racism Framework;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(vi) reducing citizenship processing times by 42 per cent to the lowest level in six years; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(vii) clearing the visa backlogs for nearly 1 million people left behind by the Liberal Party and slashing wait time;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) that Australia is proudly one of the world's most vibrant and successful multicultural societies; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the positive contribution that migration has made to our country, culture and economy; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) condemns the:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) Liberal and National parties for their neglect of the immigration system, as outlined in the Nixon Review; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) comments from a former Prime Minister on 2 November 2023, when he stated that he 'always had trouble' with the concept of multiculturalism.</para></quote>
<para>After a long week in this building it is always a pleasure to return home to Bennelong, and for the entirety of February Bennelong has been bouncing. Last Saturday was the final day of the fortnight-long Lunar New Year celebrations, and as for many cultural celebrations throughout the year our town centres were lit up, our shops and restaurants were full, and families and friends spent time together. The sense of unity within the community was truly extraordinary. I'm not Chinese, Korean or Vietnamese, and it's not in the French or Mauritian cultures to celebrate Lunar New Year, but there I was, leaning right into the year of the dragon. I attended event after event. I dotted lion and dragon eyes and held red and blue lanterns in Eastwood Koreatown. I, too, took my family out for a huge Lunar New Year lunch alongside Bennelong's diverse community. Through it all, I couldn't help but reflect upon the incredible contribution multiculturalism has made to our nation.</para>
<para>Australian multiculturalism is truly something unique and special. Across every town, sporting club and school there are stories about how multiculturalism has made Australia better. I'm privileged to represent a diverse and multicultural community, Bennelong, which is filled with people with stories just like mine. I'm honoured to be the first member of Bennelong with a funny-sounding name. Like 58 per cent of Bennelong, I can speak a language other than English at home. Like 66 per cent of Bennelong, both my parents were born overseas. I'm just like the rest of our community—diverse, multilingual and proud of who we are.</para>
<para>Representing Bennelong is not only about representing multiculturalism; it's about protecting it too. So you can imagine my horror when in November last year Bennelong's longest serving member of parliament and one of the Liberal's most celebrated former prime ministers confessed that he had 'always had trouble' with the concept of multiculturalism. He went on to say:</para>
<quote><para class="block">"… one of the problems with multiculturalism is we try too hard to institutionalise differences, rather than celebrate what we have in [common]."</para></quote>
<para>To Mr Howard and to the Liberal Party I say that those views are wrong and offensive, because in a modern, vibrant and diverse Australia we can celebrate our differences and we can celebrate what we have in common. We can do both. I truly believe that it's in our culture to celebrate the culture of others. When I joined thousands of locals celebrating Australia Day and Lunar New Year no-one was thinking about how cultural difference was being institutionalised, as Mr Howard put it. We were all celebrating together. We were all stunned by the high-pole lion dance, we all danced along with Korean drummers—and plenty loved the thong-throwing contest on Australia Day. We did all that together, not apart.</para>
<para>I'm proud to be part of a government that supports multiculturalism and multicultural communities. We believe in a fair and functioning migration system, we support community language schools and we back local multicultural projects. Mr Howard's views belong in an Australia that doesn't exist anymore, an Australia that—thankfully—has not existed for a long time. Mr Howard's views need to be condemned promptly and without qualification. Up until this moment, we have had near total silence from the Liberals on the comments of their favourite son.</para>
<para>In closing, I would like to challenge speakers from the opposition to condemn Mr Howard's archaic views. I note the shadow minister is next on the list to speak. The member for Wannon has the opportunity here to draw a line in the sand for the modern Liberal Party. I challenge him to stand up and condemn Mr Howard's views. Only a direct repudiation of these views will tell Bennelong and Australia that the modern Liberal Party values multiculturalism, because, if they don't, their five minutes of platitudes here will mean nothing. What Mr Howard said was out of touch, and the Liberal Party's near total silence about it has been shameful.</para>
<para>Should Mr Howard or the member for Wannon decide to return to Bennelong then it will be well worth noting the three absolute truths about our modern-day community: firstly, Bennelong is stronger because of our differences; secondly, Bennelong thrives because of our diversity; and thirdly, Bennelong is better because of multiculturalism. Mr Howard is wrong, and his views should be condemned. I commend this motion to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>176304</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RAE</name>
    <name.id>300122</name.id>
    <electorate>Hawke</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SPENDER</name>
    <name.id>286042</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Australia can lay claim to being the world's most successful multicultural country, and I think it is one of the reasons I am most proud to be Australian. The joys and successes of multiculturalism are all around us. Those joys and successes are in my children's school, where the end-of-year concert celebrates songs and traditions from a variety of religions and cultures. They were in my former workplace, where we would have international day, and everyone would bring food from their different cultures. They were in Emanuel Synagogue the other evening, when people came from a range of different faiths to break bread and to talk about their common values at a time when people are trying to tear us apart.</para>
<para>We have a high level of support for multiculturalism, as a 2022 mapping social cohesion report by the Scanlon Foundation found, with 88 per cent of people agreeing that multiculturalism has been good for this country, and 86 per cent saying that immigrants improve our society by bringing in new ideas and cultures. There is also strong evidence that our success also contributes to our economic success. For instance, immigrants in Australia have an unemployment level that is just 0.3 per cent higher than native-born Australians. This is remarkable compared to the OECD average, with immigrants having an almost three per cent higher unemployment rate than the native-born. Even countries we admire like Sweden and Denmark have 11 per cent, or almost four per cent higher unemployment rates of immigrants rather than native-borns. It is absolutely remarkable what we have achieved as a country.</para>
<para>Our multicultural success underpins not just our cultural strength but our economic future, and multiculturalism has to be something that we invest in and protect, because this is actually the hardest time I have ever witnessed as an Australian for our social cohesion. I believe this is a time we need to work harder than ever to preserve the multicultural success that has underpinned us. How do we do that? Looking at the evidence, there are three key requirements. Firstly, we need to continually build the bridges between different parts of our community. Secondly, we need to have supportive institutions, including this one. Finally, we need a strong and inclusive economy that provides dignity and economic opportunities to all.</para>
<para>The father of social psychology, Floyd Allport, did some extremely important research about something we understand intuitively. When we regularly and positively interact with people from different backgrounds, from different cultures and from different perspectives, we build tolerance, even of people who we were previously prejudiced against. This was true of the American soldiers that Allport studied, who, if they were in more contact with German civilians, were more supportive and inclusive of them; and soldiers of mixed platoons, again, were more inclusive than those in segregated platoons.</para>
<para>But for all those interactions to bond us together, the interactions need to be between people who come together as equals in the workplace, in the sports team and at school. Robert Putnam identified the need for both bonding social capital, which ties people within groups together, and for bridging social capital, which builds bridges between members of different groups. Since October last year we have seen events overseas divide and undermine our social cohesion. In my community, concern and fear about antisemitism has never been greater. Other communities are equally concerned about other forms of racism and religious discrimination, including Islamophobia. We need to come back to that strong bond that Australians share and we need to come back to the bridging. For me, this is why I support in institutions in Australia—for instance, like my lifesaving clubs, the local SES and my primary schools. These are the institutions that bring people together as equals and build those bridges between different parts of our community. It's also why I'm so proud of people like Anna and Rabbi Kamins, people who are going out of their way at this time of need to build bridges between different parts of our community—to hold us together right now. But as well as having that interaction between us we also need institutions that underpin us—institutions such as parliament. We have to make sure that it underpins society and ensures that we don't have discrimination; that should be driven by our parliament.</para>
<para>Finally, we need inclusive economic growth. What we see from history is that in times of great financial strain it is actually the far-right parties who normally prosper. I think that part of our cohesion in Australia has been built on our prosperity—prosperity that is shared across the Australian community.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms FERNANDO</name>
    <name.id>299964</name.id>
    <electorate>Holt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Albanese Labor government talks the talk and walks the walk when it comes to ensuring a diverse and inclusive Australia. The government and the Australian Labor Party recognise the importance of ensuring that the extraordinary and positive contribution of successive generations of migrants is not only welcomed but encouraged and celebrated. A brief glance at the current Labor caucus shows this philosophy in action: it is one where several members trace their origins to different parts of the world but are united in their belief in working towards a better future for all Australians.</para>
<para>However, our support for Australians from non-English speaking backgrounds does not stop at guaranteeing a caucus that reflects Australia's diversity. We also make sure it's reflected in our policy-making. Former Labor prime minister Gough Whitlam introduced the official policy of multiculturalism. We, as the party of Whitlam, have strengthened it and will continue to do so. Australia's vibrant and modern multicultural society is a national strength, and part of guaranteeing the continued success of multiculturalism in Australia is ensuring that our nation's institutional, legislative and policy-making framework reflects the nature of our multicultural society. The Multicultural Framework Review will help in promoting a government that works for multicultural Australia. It's an opportunity to examine the first principles of multiculturalism in this country and to provide clarity on their relevance, responsiveness and adaptability. This involves exploring many aspects of Australian policy-making, including the effectiveness of existing federal legislative regulatory and policy settings, and their interaction with state and local government settings; the role and functions of government and non-governmental organisations in identifying pathways to address systematic barriers; and the effectiveness of current diversity, equity and inclusion strategies for promoting leadership opportunities among people from CALD backgrounds. I thank the panel and reference group for the incredible work they're doing in formulating this review and I look forward to their report to the government next month.</para>
<para>When Australian Labor Party, led by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, formed government in May 2022 there was a backlog of over one million visa applications that had been unopened. This government got on with efficient and diligent processing of these applications by hiring more than 650 additional staff in visa-processing roles since May 2022. In addition, the government adjusted our migration policy to address Australia's critical human resource shortages by prioritising skilled visas in the health and education sectors.</para>
<para>Besides addressing visa applications, the government has ensured that Australians who have done the right thing and want to accept Australian citizenship are supported in doing so. Since we formed government, average citizenship processing times have decreased by 34 per cent, and 62 per cent of people are now waiting less than three months to attend a citizenship ceremony. This has removed the anxiety and stress of extended waits for those who would love to call Australia their country and their home.</para>
<para>Language is an essential aspect of culture and identity, and community language schools play a crucial role in preserving cultural heritage, with a history dating back to 1857. There are now more than 700 language schools operating across Australia, teaching over 100,000 students in over 85 languages. In recognition of their key role in promoting multiculturalism, the government committed $18.2 million in the 2023-24 budget to fund community language schools so that more Australian children have the chance to learn a second language.</para>
<para>I would like to conclude by commending the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs, the Hon. Andrew Giles, for his remarkable work in ensuring a multicultural Australia. For the Albanese Labor government, multiculturalism is not an afterthought but the cornerstone of government policy.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
    <electorate>Riverina</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I wish to thank the member for Bennelong for bringing this important motion to the House, and I want to especially acknowledge the work that the member for Adelaide has done in this place and elsewhere around the nation and right across the world, particularly with the World Hellenic Inter-Parliamentary Association, of which he is vice-president. The Greek community owe him a debt of gratitude, and I look forward to working with him to promote Hellenic activities and all that is great about Greece in the future.</para>
<para>I come from Wagga Wagga. It is a proud multicultural city. We have 114 nationalities represented in the city and they speak 107 languages, and that is just fantastic. Wagga Wagga is home to one of the largest Yazidi communities outside the Middle East, and I want to pay credit to the now opposition leader for the work that he did to enable them to have safe passage and a safe home under our compassionate visa arrangements. I well recall the conversation which followed the multiple genocides and attacks in 2014 at the hands of the extremists known as Daesh or ISIS, where the Yazidi community were targeted and killed. The now opposition leader, as immigration minister, called me and asked me if I would be prepared to have these Yazidi refugees settled in Wagga Wagga, and within a nanosecond I said yes. It wasn't even a consideration or a thought. Of course Wagga Wagga would. It's been such a welcoming community. Hundreds of Yazidis now call Wagga Wagga home. One of them, Dawlat Gundor, in fact worked for me, and what a great presence and smile she brought to my workplace! She's now studying law here in Canberra. The story that she had, from back in her homeland to where she is now, is quite an incredible one. Wagga Wagga is much the richer for our Yazidis and, of course, our people from so many other nations right across the world.</para>
<para>I am not making this political, but I want to talk also about the work that we did as a coalition government in nine years to help multicultural issues and to assist people who came to this land from elsewhere, right across the world. We know that in the second verse of our national anthem we say:</para>
<quote><para class="block">For those who've come across the seas</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">We've boundless plains to share.</para></quote>
<para>Indeed we do. The previous coalition government provided $10 million in funding through the Community Languages Multicultural Grants program to support not-for-profit community language schools. For the Adult Migrant English Program, the 510-hour cap was removed and the amount of support was made unlimited. There was a $50 million investment in the highly successful Safer Communities Fund. We made places of worship safer and more secure, and that was important. The Safer Communities Fund, through early intervention grants, provided $119.5 million for 133 recipients for activities to engage youth at high risk. These all helped the multicultural communities. We invested in $8.1 million into the Fostering Integration Grants program to support activities that celebrate and recognise Australia's multicultural communities through festivals and events. We all have those events in our home towns. Indeed, in Wagga Wagga, the FUSION Multicultural Street Festival is one of the largest, if not the largest, community festivals outside the Wagga Wagga Gold Cup horse race, first run in 1873. This fusion festival, only instituted in recent years, has grown to the extent that thousands of people celebrate and commemorate all that is great about multiculturalism.</para>
<para>The former government launched a dedicated campaign to inform culturally and linguistically diverse communities about skills and training opportunities, and that was important. It resulted in tens of thousands of enrolments in skills training from multicultural Australians. We need to continue to invest in those who come across the seas to make Australia home. We need to ensure that they know they can come to a land which is safe and secure and, indeed, that they can contribute, as they have for many years past, to make our nation even greater.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GEORGANAS</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
    <electorate>Adelaide</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I would like to thank Mr Laxale for his contribution and for moving this particular motion. I would also like to mention the member for Riverina as well for his contribution on the World Hellenic Inter-parliamentary Association. He has attended a few of our conferences and contributed greatly. It shows that here in Australia all you have to do is scratch the surface of someone's background and you find that they have come from somewhere.</para>
<para>In Adelaide, just like the whole of Australia, if someone struggles with the idea of multiculturalism, they are missing out on a fundamental part of understanding over half of our nation. It is important to acknowledge, aside from Indigenous Australians who rightfully claim this land and were the first inhabitants, nearly all of my constituency have a migrant history, whether it be from Irish stock a couple of hundred years ago or from Britain right through to the big influx of migrants that came from Greece, Italy, Europe after World War II, right through to today, with people from the Middle East, India, China and other countries. With over half of our residents proudly bearing multicultural roots, this recognition underscores the importance of respecting the fact that we are guests on this land as well of the Indigenous people. If each person in this room traced their family tree, they would find roots from abroad.</para>
<para>Recently, over 8,600 individuals in my electorate celebrated the year of the Dragon. I had the privilege of joining the vibrant communities in Gouger Street this year with many from the Asian communities who celebrated Chinese New Year. What made it truly exceptional was the diverse crowd, not just Chinese, Vietnamese or Koreans but everyone from every background you could think of. I would also like to acknowledge the member for Sturt, who was present on the night. This inclusivity speaks volumes about the universal appeal of this tradition embraced by the entire community in my electorate of Adelaide.</para>
<para>Easter is around the corner, and more than 10,000 people in Adelaide will be celebrating at a different time, or even twice if they have a culturally mixed family and friends. We have to appreciate the good things that migration brings. It has made our country, our culture and our economy better. Speaking for myself, I absolutely love being involved in the traditions from all cultures, learning where people come from and how they got here. What I really love is the fact that my grandkids go to school with a bunch of friends from different backgrounds, different ethnicities. My grandkids, who are fourth generation, are learning their ancestral language from their great-grandfather, who is Greek. They get to learn and celebrate a multicultural Australia without having to hide where they come from, like people in my generation had to when we were kids. I also want to take a moment to appreciate those wonderful teachers who put in the effort to say each child's name just right and correctly, without changing their names—as our names were changed when we first went to school. If it's something you haven't heard before, it's those little things that really make a big difference in recognising where we all come from.</para>
<para>It's appalling that our immigration system was neglected under the previous government. In my office, we felt the fallout. We were dealing with hundreds of people regularly asking about their visas and explaining how their loved ones were still in danger. We advocated strongly for each person walking through our doors. Clearing the visa backlog of nearly one million people, left behind by the former government, hasn't been easy—</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GEORGANAS</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Well, there were a million people, but, with our minister and the Prime Minister's leadership, we're making progress. Our citizenship processing times are down by 42 per cent, the lowest in six years; we're launching the Multicultural Framework Review; we're investing $20 million in the Adult Migrant English Program; and we're extending language programs to preschoolers. This government is allocating $7.5 million to the Australian Human Rights Commission to combat racism. This should demonstrate the government's efforts to support Australia's multicultural communities and work together to ensure that these improvements make a real impact on people's lives. Truly, multiculturalism here in Australia is one of the best things that we have going for this country, where we all live in harmony and in peace and acknowledge one another's cultures.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
    <electorate>Wannon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Australia is truly one of the best multicultural nations in the world. Australia proudly celebrates its multiculturalism, recognising the contributions of its diverse communities to every aspect of society. In my electorate of Wannon, we are no different. We have people who have come from right across the world who are all making a significant contribution to my wonderful electorate. Right across the board, we're seeing more and more of the diversity and the multiculturalism that makes us such a wonderful country, whether it be the Islamic community in Ararat, the Dutch and New Zealanders who are adding to our dairy community or the Indians and the Thais giving us those wonderful flavours right throughout our restaurants.</para>
<para>But it's sad to see what those in government are now doing when it comes to immigration. It really is sad to see. I find it extraordinary that in bringing this motion forward they seek to criticise us for the neglect of the immigration system when that is exactly what they are doing themselves. The Nixon review is mentioned here. The government sat on the Nixon review for eight months. It was such an important review and they sat on it for eight months, and they've done nothing when it comes to implementing it.</para>
<para>I can tell you that the proof is in the pudding when it comes to this because 23,000 asylum seekers came to Australia by plane in the last year, and the government just sat there and said, 'There's nothing we can do about it, but we've got the Nixon review, which we sat on for eight months.' They have done nothing with it. They're talking about visa processing. They processed visas, and all of a sudden they realised we've got a problem: 1.6 million people are coming to this nation over five years. Everyone just says 'Where are they going to live?' They have brought in more people than live in the city of Adelaide. Has the housing caught up? No. So what do we have now in this country? We've got a housing crisis, we've got a rental crisis and we've got a cost-of-living crisis—and what is the government doing to try and deal with all that? Nothing. They are not doing anything to address those issues. They are sitting on their hands and saying, 'It's all too hard.' They don't have a plan. A big Australia by stealth will not deliver for this nation. What do we on this side want? We want a better Australia, not Labor's bigger Australia, because you haven't done any of the planning. There is a rental crisis in this country. There is no rental availability, and yet what is the answer of those opposite? Nothing. They're just putting more and more pressure on everything and saying, 'It is all too hard.'</para>
<para>They're talking about visa backlogs. I can tell you the visas are backing up again. What is the government doing? The government is saying, 'The only way we can slow down and try and fix our mess is by not processing the visas.' That is what they're doing, because they've got no other way now to deal with the mess that they have created. It is what always happens under Labor. Labor makes a mess of immigration—and I haven't even started yet on what has happened. Two boats have now arrived on the coast of Western Australia. What is the Prime Minister's response to that? He said, 'No-one called me to tell me they had arrived.' What a load of nonsense.</para>
<para>We've got the detainee debacle of 149 hardened criminals, including seven murderers and 37 sex offenders, all released into the community, and the hapless and hopeless immigration minister has no idea where they are. He will not tell the public where they are. He won't even tell the public what they're doing in terms of monitoring them. There is huge community concern, and those opposite really couldn't care. Stop playing politics and get on and do your job.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PERRETT</name>
    <name.id>HVP</name.id>
    <electorate>Moreton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Bennelong for this motion, because it gives me the chance to talk about how proud I am to represent the electorate of Moreton, which has a diverse mix of cultural and ethnic communities. We have a large Chinese diaspora, Indians, Taiwanese, Pasifika, Somalis, Eritreans, Ethiopians, Sudanese, Rwandans, Filipinos, South Africans, a First Nations community, British, New Zealanders, Fijians, Koreans, Vietnamese, people from the Balkans, and so many more. We have a rich and vibrant community thanks to these people. The cultural and faith celebrations, the food, the festivals and the community service all help inspire and drive community cohesion.</para>
<para>I'm proud that in Moreton people feel a sense of belonging and are at ease mixing with people from different ethnic and faith backgrounds. This reflects the fact that 89 per cent of Australians agree with the statement 'Multiculturalism has been good for Australia,' where we see three streams combined for healthy water: the First Nations stream, 65,000 years old and still flowing strong; the British input, providing justice, democracy and other institutions; and then the third stream, particularly after World War II. All three streams combine to form one strong healthy river—an ancient and a modern Australian river.</para>
<para>The Albanese government is committed to building on our achievements as a cohesive and inclusive multicultural society. Generations of migrants from over 300 different ancestral backgrounds have helped shape our country and our shared values. This is not something that just happens magically; it takes foresight and leadership. Sadly, as we've seen in places like former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, cohesion can disappear overnight. Harmony requires vigilance and constant work. Neil Young said, 'Rust never sleeps', but trust never keeps. It must be maintained daily, because there'll always be politicians and others who want to divide.</para>
<para>After years of mismanagement and delay by the former coalition government, Labor moved to process the backlog of visa applications from people wishing to move here and contribute to our multicultural society. To assist with economic growth and labour shortages we've prioritised skilled visas, especially those in the health and education sectors. We also acknowledge the importance of permanent residency and citizenship. On Australia Day this year I was privileged to attend three citizenship ceremonies, and, like always, I was struck by the emotions on display as those being welcomed into our Australian family gave their oaths and affirmations. They're filled with pride and hope, and faith in our multicultural future.</para>
<para>Since Labor came to government, the average processing time for citizenship has decreased by 34 per cent, and more than two-thirds of people are now waiting fewer than three months to attend a citizenship ceremony. We've also extended our direct pathway to citizenship for our Kiwi brothers and sisters, with more than 44,000 applications since July of last year. I had sought of the minister that they must ditch their loyalty to the All Blacks, but apparently that is unconstitutional!</para>
<para>To ensure future government policies and organisational arrangements are inclusive, cohesive and support our multicultural society, we ran the Multicultural Framework Review, hosting 150 consultation sessions and receiving 700 submissions. We're also funding programs that make a direct, positive impact. I know the member for Bennelong supports people having a second language. Funding of $18.2 million is going to our community language schools, enabling more Australian children to learn a second language and, by default, deepen their cultural awareness, understanding and acceptance—and perhaps open up future trade opportunities. These schools are also vital in the preservation and honouring of cultural heritage, and have actually been operational here in Australia since the 1850s. And the Adult Migrant English Program has been bolstered by $20 million of funding to deliver English language classes flexibly, both online and in community and workplace settings.</para>
<para>While the majority of Australians are supportive of and grateful for our multicultural society, it's important to continue to combat the scourges of racial discrimination and racism. These have no part in Australian society and we must call them out—I thank the member for Bennelong for doing that. The Racial Discrimination Act provides a solid foundation. Section 18C of the act prohibits acts that offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate someone because of their race or colour, or their national or ethnic origins. I remember that a former coalition government tried to repeal section 18C, but Labor, with the support of our multicultural communities, stopped that. Australia balances freedom of expression with the right to be free from racial discrimination, and we do it well. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr STEVENS</name>
    <name.id>176304</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I appreciate the opportunity to rise in this chamber to talk about the importance of multiculturalism and the multicultural communities of my electorate. I appreciate the similar contributions that most members have made about their electorates and about the pleasure it is, and the honour, of serving in this place and doing the work we get to in our communities. I think everyone says, to a tee—and indeed I say—that engaging with our multicultural communities is definitely the most enjoyable part of being a local member of parliament. In fact, I think the greatest honour of being a member of parliament is to attend citizenship ceremonies and be there when people take that oath or affirmation. They have chosen to make their future in our country and, whilst I'm proud to have been born in Australia, it's a particular honour when someone chooses this country to make their future in. We're so lucky that, as a nation, we have such a very rich tapestry of people who have come from all across the planet to make their future in Australia.</para>
<para>On most of the globally available statistics we're close to the nation with the highest number of people born overseas, which is something to be particularly proud of. I think it's just over 30 per cent of Australians who were born overseas, and we know that in the recent census more than half of Australians either themselves were, or had at least one parent, born overseas. This is a problem for some of us seeking election to this place, of course—as we know, under section 42—but happily it's a bit clearer for those political aspirants. Nonetheless, it's something to be greatly proud of. Also, when we look at some of the other nations with a high proportion of migrants, Australia is certainly at the top when it comes to the great, rich tapestry and blend of backgrounds of people that have come here.</para>
<para>We know about the history of migration to this nation from the time of European settlement. Initially, for the first century or more, migrants were largely from the British Isles—sometimes quite involuntarily. Many of us may have forebears that didn't necessarily choose to come to Australia in the early part of the post-European colonial period. Of course, there was that disgraceful period of time when we had a very racist migration policy in this nation, known as the White Australia policy, that put certain caveats and requirements on people being able to come to this country. Thankfully, that was dismantled. I particularly pay tribute to former prime minster Harold Holt, who made some of the most significant elements of change to the migration system to ensure that we removed the appalling racism that was present in the migration policies of the Commonwealth government.</para>
<para>We know, of course, that the post-Second World War period saw a large number of Mediterranean and southern European migration. I'm very proud to represent the largest Italian community of any electorate in the country in my electorate of Sturt. A little over 27,000 people in the last census identified their Italian ancestry in my electorate of Sturt, and I'm very proud that my electorate has the largest Italian community of any electorate in the country. That Italian community is very vibrant, and there are still first-generation Italians that came here in that very difficult post-Second World War period, which brought so many important traditions, particularly rooted in their faith, in their Catholicism. In my community, we have many important and significant religious festas, celebrations of the feasts of saints, that are so very significantly linked to the communities from which that Italian migration came. There are some communities in my electorate where there are more people who are descended from migrants that came from particular villages than there are people in the villages in Italy where they came from. It goes to show how significant that wave of migration was.</para>
<para>The second-largest community has those of Chinese ancestry. Then it's those of Indian ancestry, and then Greek—I could go on. In the last week or eight days, we've had two significant local cultural celebrations in my electorate. We had the Norwood Greek cultural festival just on Saturday night, two days ago. The member for Adelaide, who spoke earlier on this motion, was there with a number of other state parliamentary colleagues. It was a great opportunity to celebrate Greek culture and the Greek contribution in my electorate of Sturt. And, last weekend, like in so many other communities across the country, there were the celebrations of Lunar New Year.</para>
<para>As a member of parliament, it is a great honour to be at these events across our various multicultural communities, to join with those communities to celebrate their culture and to thank them for bringing their culture and those traditions to this country. I truly believe—and I'm sure no member would disagree—that Australia is the greatest multicultural country on earth. We want to see our multicultural communities continue to grow and thrive, to celebrate their history and their ancestry and to embrace the opportunities that Australia provides them while also celebrating the past that they bring to enrich our nation in doing so.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>201906</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Passports</title>
          <page.no>135</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CALDWELL</name>
    <name.id>306489</name.id>
    <electorate>Fadden</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) a report released on 7 February 2024 by the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) on the Australian Passport Office revealed that passport applications were not being processed in a 'timely and resource efficient manner';</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) since being elected, the Government has hiked up the price of Australian adult passports of 10 years by $38 and is planning for a second increase this year of $52 from 1 July 2024;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) while the Treasurer has called the price hike a 'relatively modest' change, Australians will be paying 29 per cent more to get their passports during a cost of living crunch; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) Australians already pay more for their holiday thanks to the Government blocking airline competition and now they are paying more just to be allowed to leave the country; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) calls on the Government to reverse their big passport price hike until they comprehensively respond to the ANAO recommendations so that Australians get a fair deal on passports.</para></quote>
<para>Australians are paying more for their passports under this Albanese Labor government in return for what is a woefully inefficient service. A report released on 7 February by the Australian National Audit Office on the Australian Passport Office has revealed: 'Passport applications are not being processed in a time and resource efficient manner.' The report also found that the approach of the Australian Passport Office was not customer focused. Since being elected, Labor has hiked up the price for Australians, with an adult passport for 10 years going up by $38. If that weren't enough, they announced in MYEFO in December last year that there would be a second increase of 15 per cent from 1 July 2024. Fifteen per cent on an adult passport for 10 years is $52. That means Australians will be paying almost $400 for a passport from 1 July.</para>
<para>If we think of a typical Australian family of four—two adults and two children—to get those passports, it's going to cost almost $1,200. To make matters worse, let's say that someone needed their passport urgently—the priority processing fee has gone up by $15. Take into account the 1 July increase, and you're looking at a $290 processing fee. That, with a 10-year passport, will now cost you $688. The icing on the cake—or, rather, the next big slap in the face—was that the Treasurer called the 15 per cent increase 'relatively modest'. In a desperate cash grab, the Albanese Labor government has twice hiked the price of passports, with a third increase to come, yet this report reveals that Australians are forking out more just to wait longer for their passports. The ANAO report recorded that 24 per cent of passport applications for the 2022-23 financial year took longer than six weeks to process. The joke of the analysis is that the Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs put out a statement in March 2023 stating:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The Albanese Government is helping more Australians get travelling again, with passport wait times now back to pre-COVID normal.</para></quote>
<para>We cannot deny that there was a huge surge in passport applications following a hiatus during the COVID years. However, this does not explain the Labor government's intent to keep hiking up prices even after demand has returned to pre-COVID levels.</para>
<para>It seems that the Albanese Labor government has no shame in slugging Australians with higher passport fees whilst delivering woefully inadequate services during our cost-of-living crisis. The cost of international travel has increased by 23 per cent in 15 months, yet the Labor government prevented competition by blocking a bid by Qatar Airways for more flights. Australians already pay more for their holiday thanks to Labor blocking airline competition. Now they're paying more just to be allowed to leave the country.</para>
<para>While this government talks up a big cost-of living-relief agenda, we know that when Labor gives with one hand it will take twice as much from you with the other. We saw it recently with the spin on the tax cuts, where a $15-a-week tax relief measure was billed as revolutionary. Whilst the relief is welcome, net disposable income for the Australian family has fallen by $8,000, almost $160 a week, under this Labor government. During a cost-of living-crunch, the Albanese Labor government is putting a holiday even further out of reach for hardworking Australians.</para>
<para>The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade has accepted all nine recommendations of the ANAO report pushing for:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… improving the measurement of time efficiency, a greater focus on resource efficiency, improved complaints handling and improving the department's time and resource efficiency.</para></quote>
<para>The Albanese Labor government should reverse their big passport price hikes until they have comprehensively responded to these recommendations so that Australians can get a fair deal on passports, not just a costly, stressful mess. At a time when Australians are struggling with a cost-of-living crisis, another price hike is the last thing young families want. Whether it's the introduction of a new tax or a price hike, life will always be more expensive under Labor. So, yet again, we see the true colours of a Labor government shining through. Not only are they failing to deliver the actual service that Australians deserve and need in a timely fashion but we are all paying more.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HILL</name>
    <name.id>86256</name.id>
    <electorate>Bruce</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I know it's Monday but—oh, dear me!—you don't know whether to laugh or cry. I know this bloke's new here. I don't know actually know who he is, but I know he's new here. But, if someone told you to do this, just say no next time. Honestly. If you wrote this, use ChatGPT next time. This is ridiculous.</para>
<para>Yes, you're right: the first bit of the ANAO report on the Australian Passport Office, released on 7 February, revealed:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Passport applications are not being processed in a time and resource efficient manner.</para></quote>
<para>Well, yes, they did find that. Of course they did. But keep reading the report, because, if you think this is an attack on the government, you've missed the point. I wonder why the Audit Office found that. They confirmed what everyone who tried to get a passport in 2022 knew: the previous government failed to plan for an entirely predictable surge in passport applications. It's bleedingly obvious. It's not rocket science. When you close the borders for a couple of years, millions of passports expire. Why would people renew a passport when they're not going to travel? And then guess what? You open the borders and there are millions more passport applications. It's entirely predictable. It's so simple that even the Liberals should have been able to understand it. The ANAO audit report also found that the former coalition government was warned in December 2020 to prepare for 'a pent-up demand surge'. Anyone should have been able to see it. The Public Service warned them, but they did nothing. They had ample time to prepare. It was a complete failure in governance by the Liberals to prepare directly for these backlogs and delays which Australians experienced.</para>
<para>Because of their failure and incompetence, it took 50 days, on average, to get a passport at the peak of the delays. That means people missed trips. They missed people's funerals. They missed family weddings. They missed being reunited with their loved ones they hadn't seen during their precious bit of annual leave, the time that they could go. They missed work trips. They missed paid-for holidays because of the incompetence of that mob opposite, who are so silly they come in and move a motion thinking they're attacking the government when they're attacking themselves. They weren't very good at being the government. They're not very good at being the opposition. What's the contrast? This government fixed their mess. In 2023, 94.9 per cent of routine passport applications resulted in passports being issued in a 10-day time frame. The average wait time to get a passport was down to 3.9 days. I genuinely have no idea why they chose to bring a debate on their own failure.</para>
<para>But how could they fail at something this basic? Well, if you watch the television you might get a clue. It's because, instead of governing, during that wasted decade of decay and division they were fighting with each other. Senator Reynolds described their culture. She talked about people being blackmailed, threatened or intimidated to sign a petition. Senator McKenzie said that, while that internal war was going on, 'it was like being strapped to a suicide bomber'. She said: 'Something horrific and catastrophic was going to happen. You wish they wouldn't do it, but they do it anyway.' The former member for Bennelong, John Alexander—there's a much better member for Bennelong over there, I see—also said something, and this is one of their own describing the former government and what it did instead of fixing the Passport Office. This is what he said about their government: '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.'</para>
<para>So let's be really clear. This is a silly motion. They think they're attacking the government, and they're attacking themselves and exposing their own record of failure. There was an entirely predictable surge in passport applications that their government failed to plan for because they were too busy fighting each other and trying to get back at each other as if it were a never-ending version of <inline font-style="italic">Mean Girls</inline>. In their case, it was mainly mean boys.</para>
<para>Finally, I will finish on the other bit of the motion, on the cost of passports. Yes, as you said, the No. 1 priority is addressing cost-of-living pressures and providing targeted relief. The cost of passports, though, is indexed annually. This has been the case under successive governments over many years. But the point here is that we're modernising Australia's passport system so that Australia's passport remains a globally respected identity document. Right now, it's equal fifth on the list of the most secure passports in the world. It has to remain secure. We have to continue to invest more in maintaining the security of Australia's passport system, because for many Australians their passport is their primary-source identity document, and that security gives Australians visa-free access to over 180 countries. The cost of a passport over its 10 year life is less than $1 a week.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WOLAHAN</name>
    <name.id>235654</name.id>
    <electorate>Menzies</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This motion is about the unacceptable increases in passport fees and processing times. Let's be clear: this isn't a conversation or debate about a luxury item. For families, particularly families with relatives overseas, we are talking of a necessity.</para>
<para>Deputy Speaker, I want you to imagine a family of four—two children and two parents—on a close-to-average income. The average income is getting closer to $100,000, so let's round it up, to make a combined family income of $200,000. That family, in the last 20 months, has seen the cost of groceries rise by nine per cent and the cost of housing increase by 12 per cent. If they have an average mortgage of $750,000, that's an increase in their mortgage payments of $22,000 after tax, and if you're on an average income that is very hard to find from other sources. They've seen the cost of electricity go up by 22 per cent and the cost of gas go up by 27 per cent. Insurance rates have hit record highs. I want you to imagine that family of four. For people in electorates like mine—where 70 per cent of residents are first- or second-generation migrants, as am I—there is often a good news story where a relative is getting married and you're invited. Or there's often a short-term tragedy, where you find out that a loved one—a parent or a grandparent—has died and you're asked to go to the funeral. Often, those are urgent requests that need urgent processing. For many families in my electorate, processing fees for a family of four require an urgent application, and that has an even increased fee. Many may not be aware of what those fees are: looking at the fees for a family of four, with the 1 July increase the $290 processing fee for a 10-year adult passport will cost $688. With two parents and then a child's passport, which is $201—and only lasts for five years, so they have to be renewed more often—we're talking about an urgent fee of $1,778.</para>
<para>Just imagine that you're a family of four in my electorate; you're struggling as it is and your parent or grandparent has passed away. You're trying to rush home to comfort your loved ones and to say your final goodbyes. For a family of four who have to go to Athens, an economy return airfare is about $14,000. To go to Hong Kong, it's just under $5,000. For those going to Rome, it's just over $10,000, economy return, and for those going to Mumbai it's just under $8,000. Then, on top of that, this government is asking you to pay $1,788 to process a document that allows you to do that.</para>
<para>This government likes to talk about its stage 3 tax cuts and how it's giving an average family like that $800. Of course we support that, because it's needed. But with this hand, $800 dollars is being given and with this hand $8,000 dollars is being taken away in loss of real income. Australians are doing it tough, and this manifests itself at the checkout in the grocery store, it manifests itself when they look at the utility bills that they have to pay and it manifests themselves when they look at the $22,000 in extra mortgage payments they have to find after tax. For families in electorates like mine, and in many metro areas in Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane and Adelaide, a $750,000 mortgage doesn't get you much—it doesn't—so they're paying a lot more than that extra $22,000 increase. Then, on top of that, when their heart is broken and they have to go and say their final goodbyes, they're being slugged with this unacceptable increase.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LAXALE</name>
    <name.id>299174</name.id>
    <electorate>Bennelong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Like the member for Menzies, I came to this place in mid-2022. There was a lot that I would have expected to be part of the job: contributing to national policy discourse, perhaps formulating some of the policy, connecting with our communities and, of course, helping people navigate through the NDIS, Medicare and other government services. I didn't expect to be completely and utterly inundated with people crying out for help to get a simple document, their passport, renewed. After our office opened we received email after email and phone call after phone call from people who were desperate to get their passports to be able to go overseas. My office was bombarded with stories of people who had been waiting for months, some needing passports within 24-hours just to be able to visit their loved ones.</para>
<para>Marilyn Psao, a devoted mother, applied for her children's passports in June, eager to embark on a long-awaited family trip. Little did she know that her joy would soon turn to anxiety as normal passport processing times were eclipsed and her wait for passports went from weeks and weeks into months. She was lucky, because our office was able to help her. But there were many who missed those deadlines, who lost money and who were unable to see sick relatives. The stress of this situation weighed heavily on Marilyn, and it complicated a process that should have been quick and easy.</para>
<para>Imeylda found herself facing the race against time as she desperately sought to obtain her passport to visit her sick father overseas. The fear of missing out on her precious moments with her loved ones was really a weight on her shoulders. The member for Menzies cited very similar stories in his speech just then but failed to acknowledge the absolute basket case that was the Australian Passport Office left by the former government. Imeylda was terrified that she would be unable to go overseas to bid farewell to her father in his time of need. Then there was Stephen and his whole family, who have been waiting since the pandemic to go overseas on a long trip. He was also stuck in the passport-processing debacle that was left by the Liberals. These aren't anecdotes. They are real stories, real emails, real phone calls to our office. These are just three examples of the scores of people across Bennelong and the thousands across the community who were let down by the former government's negligence. They, like many Australians, endured lengthy wait times, averaging 50 days at the peak of the backlog, a process that now takes a bit under four days.</para>
<para>The former Liberal government's failure to prioritise the processing of passports inflicted unnecessary suffering on ordinary Australians. This was the legacy that was left by the former government, and yet they have the gall today to put up a motion about a report that reviewed how terribly they had dealt with this predictable issue. That report laid bare the incompetence and disregard for proper planning characterised by the Liberals' 10 years in government. It reinforced what many of us already know—that the former government were more focused on themselves than doing their jobs. The report highlights the failure of the former government to prepare for the surge of demand upon the reopening of the borders. Despite warnings dating back to December 2020, the former government chose to ignore a very predictable uptick in passport applications. The member for Bruce put it very clearly before: when you close the borders, passports expire; when you open them again, people want to go overseas, and they want to renew their passports. The Passport Office warned the former government to do something about this and to employ more staff: 'You're going to get more applications.' They ignored it. Families were separated, individuals missed crucial life events, travellers incurred significant financial losses due to disrupted plans—all because the former government chose to ignore that advice. It was so predictable, yet they ignored it.</para>
<para>A recent documentary showed us how dysfunctional that government was and how they were more focused on looking at themselves than doing their jobs. Thankfully we've cleaned up the mess. It's what we were elected to do. Now, 94.9 per cent of routine passport applications are done within the target of 10 days, and the average processing time is now just 3.9 days.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WARE</name>
    <name.id>300123</name.id>
    <electorate>Hughes</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on this motion brought by the member for Fadden and I congratulate and thank him for bringing this matter to this chamber. This motion is in relation to the efficiency of passport applications. It relates to both the cost and the timeliness of that processing. I was in this chamber when I heard the member for Bruce attempt to trivialise this motion, to trivialise this issue and describe it as 'silly' on a number of occasions. Then I heard the member Bennelong in this chamber, who went through all of the reasons why it is so important to Australians that we have faith and confidence in the way that our applications for passports are processed. I was also here for the speech by the member for Menzies. He outlined how important it is, particularly during this cost-of-living crises, that Australians are not charged so much for their passports.</para>
<para>Australians are definitely paying more for their passports under this Albanese Labor government, and the National Audit Office has now found that the service is also inefficient. So we're paying more for an inefficient service. This is yet another example of the Albanese government's failure to deliver on crucial government services, another example of government mismanagement under Albanese's Labor. To back this up, the report of 7 February found some glaring errors in the Australian Passport Office's method of processing passport applications. It said that they 'are not being processed in a time and resource efficient manner'.</para>
<para>The report also found that the approach of the Australian Passport Office was not customer-focused. This is not a silly or trivial issue; this is an important issue. The issuing of passports is very important to Australians who need to go overseas to see their loved ones, their families, who want to travel and experience the sheer joy of overseas travel, embracing other cultures. Because when we embrace other cultures we learn more about the world, we learn about Australia's place in the world and we learn more about ourselves, so I simply cannot accept those on the other side saying this is a trivial issue.</para>
<para>DFAT's processing of applications, the way they do it and the amount they charge us are extremely important to Australians. The government should be making it easier for Australians to obtain passports, and I have no doubt that the public servants within the Passport Office are working as hard as they can, but this report says they need more help. They need more help from the department, which means they need more help from their minister. This is a Westminster system of government; the minister must properly resource her department.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">A division having been called in the House of Representatives—</inline></para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 12:26 to 12:39</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WARE</name>
    <name.id>300123</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The fact that we've now had two increases, and we're looking at a third, in the cost of passports for Australians is not acceptable in the cost-of-living crisis when we consider that Australians will now be paying $398, almost $400, for an adult passport. Recent analysis has found that Australia is home to the second most expensive passport in the world. We are now closer to Liechtenstein, which currently charges $432 for its passports. New Zealand passports are $194. US passports are $251. So these price increases by the Albanese Labor government now put our passport costs as the second highest in the world. But the report from the Australian National Audit Office found, concerningly, that the system is not efficient.</para>
<para>I will say it is very good to see that DFAT has now agreed to all of the nine recommendations that came out of the Audit Office's report. Hopefully, going forward, we will see more efficient processing of passports, but in the meantime I call upon the Albanese Labor government to put all future fee increases on hold until DFAT has addressed and implemented these recommendations.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURNELL</name>
    <name.id>300129</name.id>
    <electorate>Spence</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I would like to start by congratulating the now not quite so new member for Fadden for not only venturing into the foray of private members' business but also moving this motion. Sometimes you just have to cut your teeth on a motion regurgitated entirely from a media release a shadow minister sent to the whips. This media release was released earlier this month in light of the Australian National Audit Office having handed down a report on the Australian Passport Office. Between the ANAO report and the media release, only one acknowledged the border closures during the pandemic or the fact that those opposite were in government at the time, and only one provided evidence based commentary on how the Australian Passport Office was managed in that period of time. I'll give you two guesses as to which one did.</para>
<para>Passports in Australia have come a long way since Hugh Mahon, the minister responsible for regulating passports issued by the Australian government in the early days around 110 years ago—though the minister is probably more famous for being the first and only member of this place to have been expelled. But I might fast-forward to the years 2017 to 2023. During this time Australia, like most other parts of the world, grappled with the COVID-19 pandemic. During the height of the pandemic, especially if you were an Australian, it was difficult to leave or enter Australia. The numbers are understandable, given the circumstances, but nonetheless staggering, with the Passport Office reporting the demand for their services being roughly 3½ times lower than the reported average prior to the border closures being implemented. Two point two million fewer passports were issued compared to the previous six quarters. With the uncertainty of the border closures, I can definitely understand the logic in the minds of the many Australians who opted not to renew their passports during that period. As a result, in that period between 30 and 40 per cent of the Passport Office workforce was redeployed to other areas, such as Services Australia.</para>
<para>While times were indeed uncertain, with the potential to become a new normal, it was an inevitable eventuality that the borders would reopen and passports would need to be issued again at a rate exponentially higher than the atrophied number we saw at the height of the COVID years. Why the Morrison government couldn't foresee this is just another example of their shambolic way of governing, which we are now all too familiar with. They don't stamp passports, mate! It is simply astounding that the then government didn't implement surge plans, despite receiving advice on how it would look prior to borders reopening. The report noted a submission from the CPSU, which noted its members were aware of a surge plan in development, but executive management disagreed with the plan. Even the engagement of Datacom to fill gaps and provide a surge workforce did not occur until May 2022, several months after the border reopened. By that time even vacant positions within the Passport Office's regular staffing levels remained unfilled.</para>
<para>The Morrison government here, and in so many other areas, had turned Australian into the nation of procrastination when it came to rolling out plans for the pandemic, during the pandemic and after the pandemic. In the time since I was elected to this place, I have been proud to have my office work alongside DFAT and the Passport Office for many constituents who faced some tight calls to process their passports. At its peak, the Morrison Liberal government's mismanagement on passports caused wait times to blow out to an average of 50 days. Thankfully, we have now taken that average wait time down to 3.9 days. It's no mean feat to train a new workforce on the job. I can only imagine how stressful it was for everyone working there at the time, especially with many coming back from secondments in Services Australia.</para>
<para>Just because the Liberal and National parties devalued our Passport Office does not reflect how this government feels about the vital work they do, and it certainly does not mean that an Australian passport should be devalued in the same way either. After taking office, the Albanese Labor government immediately started to enact plans to train up a surge workforce that, frankly, was well over a year overdue. In addition to this, the government rolled out the R series passport, the world's most secure type of passport—something that was put on ice by the former government during the pandemic. We have a passport that is now the fifth most secure in the entire world, giving Australians visa-free access to travel to over 180 countries.</para>
<para>In closing, I want to personally thank our people in the Passport Office and DFAT for all their hard work and everything that they do in assisting the people within our electorates to ensure that they get to go on their way and travel across this great world. Thank you very much.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>144732</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cuba</title>
          <page.no>140</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CLAYDON</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
    <electorate>Newcastle</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) on 2 November 2023, Australia with 186 other member states again voted for the United Nations General Assembly resolution against the United States' longstanding economic, commercial and financial embargo against Cuba;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) only two member states have voted consistently against the resolution since it was first introduced in 1992, demonstrating overwhelming international support for the end of the embargo; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the embargo has unfairly hindered the development of the Cuban economy, created decades of economic hardship and has had a negative impact on the health and wellbeing of the Cuban people;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) further notes that the embargo:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) constitutes a serious and systemic violation of the norms of international law and the Charter of the United Nations;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) is not conducive to friendly relations and cooperation between nations and peoples, and it directly affects the development of the Cuban economy and its people; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) impedes the ability of Australian citizens to trade bilaterally;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) recognises that sustained international pressure will be one of the most influential methods of ending this enduring and unfair embargo; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) reaffirms Australia's support for an end to the embargo.</para></quote>
<para>I rise to speak on this motion moved in my name, and I acknowledge the presence of Her Excellency Mrs Tanieris Dieguez La O.</para>
<para>For 62 years the Cuban people have been subject to an unfair embargo on their economy, their industry and their society. This embargo, proclaimed by the President of the United States in 1962, was intended to isolate the then government of Cuba, reduce a perceived threat of communism and destabilise the country. Nineteen-sixty-two was a different time. Governments have changed, yet the embargo is still in place. The tensions between Washington and Havana remain unresolved, and the Cuban people continue to bear the brunt of the US sanctions, making daily life harder for Cuban families.</para>
<para>Cuba is currently going through the worst economic crisis in 30 years. Falling wages, regular power outages and a deterioration of public services mean that Cuban people are suffering. The embargo has contributed significantly to this situation. It placed a freeze on all trade to and from Cuba, including the US importation of sugar from Cuba, which was a huge industry at the time, and prevented Cuba from purchasing food and medicines from the US. It continues to prevent US businesses and businesses that are organised under US law or majority owned by US citizens from conducting trade with Cuban interests. It impedes bilateral trade with any country that also trades with the US—including with Australia, which has no sanctions or measures against Cuba that restrict trade or investment—and it prevents the free movement of people from all nations between the US and Cuba.</para>
<para>Often described as a form of economic warfare, the embargo has endured through numerous iterations and US presidential administrations. For Cuba, whose economy in 1962 greatly depended on trade with the US, this has meant an established $130 billion economic loss since the embargo began. It has kept the Cuban people economically isolated and unable to access the benefits of free enterprise and global trade; has denied access to lower-cost goods, including food and life-saving medicines; and has had a significant negative impact on the health, wellbeing and opportunities of the Cuban people.</para>
<para>Since 1992, the United Nations General Assembly has adopted a non-binding resolution calling for an end to the embargo. Each year, the resolution has had overwhelming support from the international community, including last year, when 187 of the 190 member states, together with Australia, voted for the ending of the economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed by the United States of America on Cuba.</para>
<para>Across both sides of politics, Australia has consistently expressed its opposition to the embargo, on the basis that, while the Australian government, whoever it might be at the time, doesn't endorse internal policies for Cuba, the embargo affects 'the sovereignty of other states, the legitimate interests of entities or persons under their jurisdiction, as well as freedom of trade and navigation'. We recognise that this embargo is 'not justified by the principles of international law and comity'.</para>
<para>In the debate on the UN motion, a number of member states also pointed out that the embargo runs counter to the charter of the United Nations and undermines faith in multilateralism. Australia and Cuba have good and enduring diplomatic relations. We have publicly committed to bilateral agreements in the areas of sport, diplomacy and migration, subject to the lifting of the embargo. Through the Direct Aid Program, we support projects to empower women, girls, and disadvantaged and marginalised groups in Cuba, and support education and health outcomes. Australia has worked with Cuba to support the integration of Cuban trained doctors into the Pacific health system, and we note future opportunities to work together in areas of resources, skills, pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, tourism and agriculture. Through our embassy in Mexico we support Australian investors who want to do trade with Cuba to navigate the tricky political, economic and regulatory environments.</para>
<para>The US embargo against Cuba has been going on for more than six decades, and it's considered the most enduring trade embargo in modern history. It's estimated that around 80 per cent of Cubans don't recall a time when the embargo was not in place. They don't recall a time when their country had the autonomy to operate according to international law as it should. They don't recall a time when Cubans had prosperity, opportunity and a future free from economic constraint. It's time for this embargo to end, and I call on the House to support this motion.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>144732</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I also wish to formally acknowledge the ambassador and welcome you to the chamber today. Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ENTSCH</name>
    <name.id>7K6</name.id>
    <electorate>Leichhardt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and rise to speak on this motion which is of profound significance not only for the people of Cuba but for the very principles of international cooperation and mutual respect amongst nations.</para>
<para>Firstly, I'd like to thank the member for Newcastle for putting up this important motion and commend her work as the current chair of the parliamentary friendship group for Cuba. This motion is an important mark of respect for the relationships that the two countries enjoy. I've had the privilege of serving as chair of the group for many years and currently serve as deputy. It has been and continues to be a great pleasure to grow these diplomatic ties, and I must add my voice to this very important message.</para>
<para>I'd like to acknowledge the overwhelming consensus among member states of the United Nations, which, on 2 November 2023, once again voiced their opposition to the United States's economic sanctions against Cuba. The fact that 186 nations stood in solidarity with Cuba underscores the global sentiment that the time for this embargo—a relic of the Cold War era—has long passed. We must return to the normalisation of relations.</para>
<para>This embargo is more than a bilateral issue between the United States and Cuba; it's a matter that concerns the international community. It contravenes the norms of international law and the charter of the United Nations. The repercussions of this embargo extend beyond the confines of Cuba. It hinders the rights of other nations, including Australia, to engage in basic diplomacy. For instance, the Cuban embassy here in Australia has routinely been denied access to Australian bank accounts and, as a result, has struggled to facilitate payments to local suppliers and contractors. These challenges inequitably disrupt the fundamental diplomatic operations of Cuba. This is absolutely ridiculous.</para>
<para>The Cuban people have, for decades, faced undue economic hardship due to the embargo. The impacts on their health, wellbeing and economic development are well documented and remain deeply concerning. This is a stark reminder of how policies rooted in historical animosities can perpetuate suffering and hinder progress towards a more equitable and just world order. Australia recognises the resilience and spirit of the Cuban people. The love, the joy and the culture that they and their country have to share are remarkable, not to mention the music, the dance, the food, the rum and, of course, the cigars.</para>
<para>In all seriousness, we've witnessed firsthand over decades the perseverance of this nation. Cubans' significant achievements, particularly in health care and education, despite this embargo's constraints are, quite frankly, astonishing. These achievements also amount to significant contributions to the global community, with tens of thousands of Cuban doctors regularly performing miracles around the world. Cuba's educational programs, particularly with respect to improving literacy, have given countless millions of people around the world the gift of being able to read and write. There are few nations around the world that have not felt the positive impact that Cuba has provided. Even here in Australia, we have their literacy programs underway in many disadvantaged communities, including one of our major prisons, through the Literacy for Life Foundation and the work of Professor Jack Beetson and his team. They have been successfully implementing this Cuban style literacy campaign in many areas across Australia with great success. It is incumbent on us as representatives of the Australian people and members of the international community to reaffirm our support for an end to the United States' economic sanctions against Cuba.</para>
<para>In closing, I would like to take the opportunity to thank the three Cuban ambassadors in Australia that I've had the pleasure of working with: Jose Manuel Galego Montano; his successor, Ariel Lorenzo Rodríguez; and, of course, the one sitting in the gallery at the moment, the wonderful current ambassador, Her Excellency Tanieris Dieguez La O. Sorry if I pronounced it wrong. I've built up a wonderful relationship with the three of them and their wonderful families. They have made great contributions to the development of ties between our two countries, and I certainly look forward to working on all sides of politics for further development of relations with Cuba and for finally bringing an end to this enduring and unjust embargo.</para>
<para>I will just say in closing that the embargo has been going since 1962. The overwhelming majority of Cubans, who are profoundly impacted by this, weren't even born when this was brought in in 1962. That just shows you how ridiculous this is. It's got to stop.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms VAMVAKINOU</name>
    <name.id>00AMT</name.id>
    <electorate>Calwell</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Newcastle for bringing forward this motion on the longstanding economic, commercial and financial embargo levelled against Cuba. I want to acknowledge the presence of the Cuban ambassador, who is here with us today.</para>
<para>As the motion notes, in a reflection of the overwhelming international support for the end of the embargo, Australia joined with 186 other member states in voting again in support of the United Nations General Assembly resolution against the United States' longstanding blockade against Cuba. The reality of Cuba's achievements amidst the imposition of the longest and most strict blockade is remarkable, and it's these achievements that I want to highlight today—achievements that have persevered and endured despite this embargo and have shown the resilience and determination of the people of Cuba.</para>
<para>Cuba is a small island nation that lacks natural resources, suffers from regular catastrophic weather events and has had huge economic shocks to its access to markets and resources due to changes in global political events. It has suffered from underdevelopment arising from its colonial past and, of course, the most persistent impediment: the unilateral and overwhelming blockade imposed by the United States for decades, which regrettably continues today. Despite all this, Cuba's achievements in fields critical to all countries have often surpassed those of wealthy industrialised nations in the developed world whose geography, politics, history and economy have worked in their favour. A child born in Cuba today has more chance of survival than a child born in the United States, where infant mortality is on the rise annually as Cuba's continues to decline. Life expectancy in Cuba is higher than that of the United States. Cuba's literacy rate, thanks to its free, universal and exemplary education system, stands amongst the highest in the world. Cuba possesses a highly advanced biotechnology industry that has contributed to global medicine and science, the gains in which are shared by its people, its region and, indeed, the world. Cuban citizens enjoy the benefits of a health system that is free, universally accessible and with more doctors per capita than in the United States. And it provides more medical personnel to the developing world than all of the G8 countries combined, contributing significantly to global health aid efforts.</para>
<para>As we saw during the COVID pandemic, Cuba even contributed to the healthcare outcomes of G8 countries in Europe, COVID's epicentre, through requested medical intervention. Even as I speak, there are almost 500 health workers from Cuba across all specialities in hospitals across Italy's south, providing what Italian doctors describe as 'oxygen to their health system'. In fact, in the last parliament the Australia-Cuban parliamentary friendship group happily supported the nomination of Cuba's Henry Reeve Brigade for the Nobel Peace Prize, which may have been instrumental to these life-saving initiatives.</para>
<para>So despite this blockade of Cuba and the difficulties it has imposed on Cuba, a child born in Cuba today, a nation under embargo and sanctions, has more chances of survival, will live longer, will live a healthier life, will have more access to health care, will be more educated and will be more literate than a child born today in the United States, the richest and most powerful country in the world and which has subjected Cuba to siege, subversion and invasion. This is an extraordinary reality and an incredible scale of achievement that otherwise would have seen the collapse of any other country squaring off against odds which have the sole aim of unfairly hindering the development of the Cuban economy through decades of economic hardship. As the motion highlights, the embargo constitutes a serious and systemic violation of the norms of international law and the Charter of the United Nations. The embargo remains to this day the key impediment to the development of the Cuban economy and to the welfare of its people. It impedes the global community's approach to peace and stability and to friendly relations and cooperation between nations and people, and even the ability of Australia's own citizens to trade bilaterally.</para>
<para>If we compare Cuba's achievements with those of neighbouring countries, and Cuba's influence across much of Latin and South America, we see that, despite the embargo and the economic isolation, Cuba has never been isolated from the global community. This is an attribute that attests to the determination and resilience of the people of Cuba. I would like this House to support this motion today and call for an end to and the lifting of the illegal embargo on Cuba.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
    <electorate>Riverina</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I acknowledge the presence of the Cuban ambassador in the chamber, and I acknowledge the presence of the co-chairs of the Cuban parliamentary friendship group—the member for Newcastle, who brought this motion to the parliament, and the member for Leichhardt.</para>
<para>I want to talk about trade, because trade is essential and vital. Depending on who you talk to, at least one in five, or maybe one in four, jobs in this country are dependent on trade. I have to say that, when in government, the coalition did a very good job in the space of trade. When we came to government in 2013 only about a quarter of our trade was covered by free trade agreements. When we left in 2022 that percentage had risen to around 80. So we understand the value of trade. As a coalition, we are committed to a rules-based multilateral trading system. We believe open trade and investment helps to grow our economy and to create more jobs. During the period 2013-2016, Andrew Robb was our trade minister—the former member for Goldstein. In February 2016, he led Australia's first-ever business mission to Cuba. At the time he said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Deepening economic ties, through increased trade and investment helps to promote peace and stability in regions, and increasingly, several countries are looking at Cuba in order to leverage new opportunities to mutual benefit. In this regard Australia is an early mover when it comes to engaging new markets in which to do business.</para></quote>
<para>That's what our trade minister said at the time.</para>
<para>As I said, the first order of trade is always about expanding opportunities for our own exporters by opening up more commercially significant and emerging markets. Our second priority in trade is to support the multilateral trading system. The coalition has always been committed to a rules based multilateral trading system. We believe that open trade and investment create more jobs and grow our economy. They do not just grow our own economy but grow the economies of other nations. We want to ensure that as best we can and as far as possible we can do that.</para>
<para>Of Australia's 16 free trade agreements, 13 entered into force under coalition governments—13 out of 16. The number of exporting businesses has grown by around 56,000, including more than 49,000 small and medium enterprises—that is, 10,000 more than when we came to office back in 2013. Between 2013 and 2022 we finalised 11 trade agreements, including the free trade agreement with United Kingdom and the economic cooperation and trade agreement with India.</para>
<para>This is an important motion that has been moved by the member for Newcastle, who I like, who I think brings some common sense to this place. She and I worked together for the international status of Newcastle airport, which I know she was a great advocate for, and that also led to more investment and opportunities, particularly between New Zealand and our country.</para>
<para>Importantly, Australia supported the United Nations General Assembly resolution of 2 November last year to which the member for Newcastle's motion refers. Australia has previously supported, for example, a comparable resolution of October 2014 during the coalition's time in government, of course. On each of these two occasions, as the member for Newcastle motion suggests, only the United States and Israel opposed. We understand that. Let's be honest, among the first barriers to any ending of the United States' embargo against Cuba will be the US designation of Cuba as a state sponsor of terrorism. We acknowledge that. We appreciate that not everybody will be on the same page when it comes to these things. But I also take heed of what the member for Newcastle said in her remarks. I appreciate the notations in her motion and I appreciate what my good friend the member for Leichhardt has said in the space. I acknowledge, as I say, the willingness, the cooperation, the collaboration that Cuba brings to this debate. The fact that the ambassador is in the chamber listening to this debate is important. It is a landmark moment and, indeed, the motion is vital.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ZAPPIA</name>
    <name.id>HWB</name.id>
    <electorate>Makin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I also begin by acknowledging the Ambassador of Cuba, Mrs Tanieris Dieguez, here in the chamber today. I also commend the member for Newcastle for bringing this motion to the House. It is sometimes a little sensitive to talk about something that we have perhaps been criticised about for many years for not doing more about, so it is an important motion that we are debating today.</para>
<para>On 6 April 1960—we're going back 64 years—the then Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs at the US State Department, Lester Mallory, wrote:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The majority of Cubans support Castro …</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">… … …</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The only foreseeable means of alienating internal support is through disenchantment and disaffection based on economic dissatisfaction and hardship … every possible means should be undertaken promptly to weaken the economic life of Cuba … a line of action which, while as adroit and inconspicuous as possible, makes the greatest inroads in denying money and supplies to Cuba, to decrease monetary and real wages, to bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government.</para></quote>
<para>That statement says it all because that is what it has been about for the last 64 years.</para>
<para>For over six decades, the US has aggressively pursued this harsh policy in its quest to bring Cuba to its knees. Over 80 per cent of Cuban people have lived their entire lives under sanctions and blockades that, really, were initiated before they were even born. Adding to its own sanctions, the US has used its trading influence to prevent other countries, including Australia, and private global businesses from trading with Cuba. And that is perhaps where the real impact comes from, because, if it were just the US, you could say there are plenty of other countries to trade with, but, regrettably, those embargoes and sanctions that have been applied by the US extend much further than the US alone. Indeed, the US has several of its own laws that specifically impose sanctions on Cuba or punish any of the businesses that want to trade with Cuba. The effect is that today 72 per cent of Cuban people live below the poverty line because of those sanctions. As other speakers have already said, these are people that have never shown any aggression towards the USA and were in no way associated with the events prior to 1960, yet they pay the price of a policy that denies them medical supplies, trading opportunities and unrestricted travel and imposes economic development initiative constraints. They can't even have the tourism trade that perhaps they would otherwise be able to have if it were not for those sanctions.</para>
<para>The reality is that those measures do not instil friendship between countries. We know that today more than ever before, with the world in the situation that it is in, we should be building peace and friendship between nations, not trying to separate them. Cuba is reliant on overseas countries for 70 to 80 per cent of its food. Regrettably those trade embargoes diminish the ability of that food to come into the country and, in turn, make it incredibly difficult for the Cuban people. Yet the Cuban people have shown that, through their own initiatives and with all of those embargoes in place, as other speakers have quite rightly pointed out, they have been able to get on with their lives as best they can—but that's not easy.</para>
<para>It is time that those embargoes were lifted, as this motion quite rightly alludes to, as does the resolution of the UN. Just about every country other than two of them, I believe, supported that resolution. It's in global interests to have peace between nations and to allow free trade, because we would all learn from each other and support each other in such a way that we will benefit from that two-way trade. It's so important.</para>
<para>I want to finish with this observation: the last line of each verse of the American national anthem ends with the phrase 'O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave'. It's the statement that, along with the Statue of Liberty, proudly depicts the US values of freedom, justice and opportunity. If the US believes in those values, they should be applied universally to all people, including the people of Cuba. The US should release the shackles on the Cuban people, end the embargo and allow Cuba freedom of trade.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>144732</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>First Nations Australians</title>
          <page.no>145</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PRICE</name>
    <name.id>249308</name.id>
    <electorate>Durack</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) acknowledges that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) this Government spent $450 million on the divisive Voice to Parliament referendum that was rejected by each state and territory, excluding the Australian Capital Territory;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the proposal for a Voice to Parliament was put forward as an urgent solution to help close the gap for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) since the referendum this Government has been completely absent in this space and has demonstrated that they have no plan B; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) there are proposals on the table that would make a demonstrable difference that this Government refuses to implement, including:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) announcing an audit into Commonwealth spending for Indigenous specific programs to identify waste in financial resources and programs that are making a difference;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) establishing a royal commission into child sexual abuse in Indigenous communities; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iii) re-instating the cashless debit card in vulnerable communities; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) calls on the Government to focus on practical actions like these to assist in closing the gap.</para></quote>
<para>I'm very proud to represent the second-largest Indigenous population in Australia. The disparities between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians are particularly stark in regional Western Australia, which is why I am particularly concerned about the government's approach to Indigenous affairs. The Albanese government promised everything with the Voice, yet it's now been more than four months since the referendum and we are still waiting for the government to announce or, indeed, deliver its Plan B.</para>
<para>The referendum didn't just cost Australians $450 million; sadly, it also left many Indigenous Australians feeling rejected by the rest of the country. You can't blame people for feeling that way. After all, the Voice was presented as the only way forward. Who can forget the Voice ad which told young people that without the Voice they simply weren't going to make it or that they had no control over their own life or that there is no hope? What a disgraceful thing to do.</para>
<para>It is apparent to everyone that things need to change. We saw from this year's <inline font-style="italic">Closing the gap</inline> report that we're not meeting our targets. In fact, only four are on track and some are heading in the wrong direction. But this is not due to a lack of resources. A lot of money is effectively being wasted on Indigenous affairs, and I believe we need an audit into spending. This would be an important step towards understanding where government resources can be better used. We need to look at where efforts are producing positive outcomes and stop funnelling money into places where it is not working. Quite simply, the status quo cannot continue.</para>
<para>Next we must support the next generation to reach its full potential. As was often noted during the Voice campaign, an Indigenous young man is more likely to go to jail than to go to university. We need to ensure that Indigenous youth stay engaged with their education and that kids stop having children. Investment in diversionary programs should be a central component of this strategy. Importantly, we must ensure that Indigenous children are growing up in a safe environment. Unfortunately, we know that far too many Indigenous children are the victims of abuse. A royal commission into child sexual abuse in Indigenous communities would provide direction for the Australian government and allow a targeted approach to combating this very serious issue. It's common sense that preventing trauma should be the No. 1 priority for this government.</para>
<para>Another important factor is tackling drug and alcohol abuse. The cashless debit card was a game changer for vulnerable communities that were experiencing high levels of substance abuse. I saw firsthand the difference it made in the East Kimberley. Income management meant that there was money for school lunches and food on the table rather than for buying alcohol and drugs for parents. The government's decision to remove the CDC resulted in an uptick in substance abuse and crime across the trial sites. I believe we need to reimplement the CDC. We have seen the recent events in Broome, with the introduction of further liquor restrictions by the state government demonstrating that we should take very seriously the expansion of the CDC. This will assist the fight against family and domestic violence that is often fuelled by alcohol and drug abuse.</para>
<para>Western Australian crime statistics show that family assaults are on the rise. In December the rate of family assaults in metropolitan Perth was 70 per 100,000, while in the regions more broadly it was 247. Shockingly, in the Kimberley there were 1,163 assaults per 100,000 people. This is unacceptable.</para>
<para>On 14 October, Australians overwhelmingly rejected the Prime Minister's untested Voice model. This was not a rejection of Aboriginal people—and I want to underline that. This was not a rejection of Aboriginal people. All Australians want to see our Indigenous children have all the opportunities that non-Indigenous children have.</para>
<para>I acknowledge that Indigenous affairs are not easy. But to make a change—a real and lasting change—we need leadership and we need courage. I'm calling on the government to get the courage. Tip everything upside down on the table and start again, because clearly what we're doing is not helping the people that I represent in Durack.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>144732</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Ramsey</name>
    <name.id>HWS</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Yes, it is seconded, and I reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LAWRENCE</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
    <electorate>Hasluck</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Durack for shining a light on the continuing challenges facing Australian governments in closing the gap of disadvantage experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Like my electorate of Hasluck, the member's electorate of Durack has a strong representation of diverse Aboriginal communities. When you strip away the political rhetoric in this motion it shows that the member for Durack cares, as I do, about improving outcomes. We share that common goal.</para>
<para>These are complex problems precisely because of their genesis. We must remain cognisant of the impact that the wholesale displacement of people from land, language and culture has had and the ways in which governments therefore need to respond. As the Uluru Statement from the Heart so graciously invited us to do, we need to continue to listen and be led by these communities. That statement closes with these words:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We invite you to walk with us—</para></quote>
<para>walk with us—</para>
<quote><para class="block">in a movement of the Australian people for a better future.</para></quote>
<para>I thank the member for the opportunity to speak on the government's commitment to a considered, deliberate and methodical approach to closing the gap. The Albanese government, with the leadership of Minister Burney, has engaged deeply with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to better prepare and implement policies that are community centred and that have an opportunity to provide sustainable, ongoing, positive impacts and success.</para>
<para>We have, among other things, created the new remote jobs program, funded 500 First Nations health workers, improved access to safe and reliable drinking water in the Northern Territory, committed $100 million for housing and essential infrastructure on Northern Territory homelands, provided housing for remote Northern Territory communities and created a landmark justice and reinvestment package to improve the community's safety and reduce incarceration rates. We've had over 14,000 First Nations students enrol in fee-free TAFE, improved access to renal services in remote communities, started on our plan to double Indigenous rangers by 2030 and supported the National Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation to employ 260 new workers.</para>
<para>The motion uses the words 'completely absent', and 'completely absent' describes what really has been a lack of a meaningful or coherent plan to properly listen over the last nine years of the coalition government. No clear attempt to build capacity in the community is evidenced—to be able to understand and to empower them to contribute to the conversations about solutions. It was more of the same paternalistic government-knows-best policies and packages, an approach which successive <inline font-style="italic">Closing the gap</inline> reports have shown to have been largely ineffective. This is what the Uluru statement speaks directly to. This is why our government has committed to providing an opportunity for voters to have their say on a constitutionally enshrined voice to parliament. The Australian public did not accept that proposal, even where it had overwhelming support from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. We accept the outcome of the referendum. We continue now with renewed vigour to work at the challenge of closing the gap.</para>
<para>Following the referendum, Minister Burney has continued to engage in conversations with Indigenous Australians nationwide, gaining further insights into how best to have that voice heard in the absence of the structure proposed in the referendum. The government's commitment to collaborating with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities remains steadfast, recognising the importance of their perspectives and their involvement. The priorities reiterated consistently by community and representative bodies are health, jobs, education, housing and justice. I attended the 16th anniversary celebration of the national apology during the last sitting. At that event, we were challenged by the speakers to do better. On the same day, Minister Burney and the Prime Minister recommitted the government to the task with a fresh approach entailing a focus on self-determination and the building of capacity at the community level.</para>
<para>The government's tenets are formal partnerships and shared decision-making, building the community controlled sector, transforming government organisations so that they work for everyone and shared access to data and information to better support that work. I think we can all agree that the status quo is unacceptable. The government's approach will be informed by First Nations voices. The attitude of government-knows-best without that input has demonstrably failed over the past decade. At its base, closing the gap is about addressing entrenched inequality. We can do better, and this government is committed to doing better. I look forward to the constructive contributions of the member for Durack and this House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RAMSEY</name>
    <name.id>HWS</name.id>
    <electorate>Grey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The cashless debit card was removed in Ceduna in November 2022. Minister Rishworth has accused the coalition of playing politics over its latest allegations about lawlessness in Ceduna. She says, 'There is no evidence or data the cashless debit card has worked, and Mr Ramsey's comments are misleading.' I've had more than 30 letters, mostly from Ceduna businesses, and the following are excerpts from them.</para>
<para>'I witnessed eight women fighting in front of the duty, pulling hair and carrying on like animals. I saw a tourist pull up, and he had his head under the tarp of his boat, and an Aboriginal man came up and started urinating on the side of his car. One of the worst incidents was a child being flogged for wanting money. This was heartbreaking. There was an Indigenous male repeatedly kicking and punching an Indigenous female in the head and body at 5.30 in the afternoon, with many tourists and locals, including children, witnessing this horrific event.</para>
<para>Every morning, when I arrive at work, the first job is to walk around and assess the damage to the premises and customers' vehicles stored on the premises. I feel, as does everyone, an expectation and rights to feel safe to walk in our community streets, especially in daylight hours. At the moment, this is not the case.</para>
<para>My children witnessed an attack on a group of people with an axe in front of my residence, with multiple police and ambulance officers turning up after the incident. It felt like a scene from a Mad Max movie. People are too scared to come shopping due to the numerous violent fights occurring in the vicinity daily; they're scared of becoming victims themselves. We had our windows smashed while I was standing inside the shop, even knowing the person who committed the crime but not even sure that they were charged.</para>
<para>Alcohol and drug misuse are a major concern; defecating, urinating, vomiting, yelling, swearing, arguing, verbal abuse, threats, fighting, alcohol induced sleeping, drinking alcohol, intimidation and threatening people walking by. I have to lock myself in our office when working alone due to concerns about my safety, and being unable to get in my car in the evening at times. A riot: more than 50 people involved, with people being assaulted, verbally abused and knocked out in the street. Only three police in attendance, completely outnumbered and not safe. Our gate kicked in, bike stolen, scooter stolen. I've had an Indigenous lady knocking on our door at midnight having been burnt and saying someone was trying to rape her. Two break-ins in the last three months, significant verbal abuse from people that are drunk and on drugs. Most days, we are cleaning up rubbish—paper cups from where the Red Cross give out free tea and coffee to their clients in abundance and food tins, clothing, empty drink containers. It feels wrong, having to lock ourselves in every day. Please do not ignore this email or put it in the too-hard basket. This is a very real problem and it needs urgent attention.</para>
<para>On shoplifting: shoplifters being asked to hand over attempted stolen products, then spiking and biting them before handing them over so the products then need to be destroyed. People walking in grab products off the shelf and walk out laughing. The staff no longer attempts to stop it as their vehicles are badly damaged in retaliation. They just write down the items for the insurance purposes.'</para>
<para>These comments are on the card. 'Since the Indue card was discontinued, things have got a lot worse. I'm sure if it was reinstated there would be a huge difference. Since the loss of the card, I've observed a noticeable increase in such bad behaviour. Customers that would have qualified for the Indue card are now unable to access enough funds to have their vehicles repaired. While the Indue card was active, a massive improvement in our central business district; antisocial behaviour was reduced significantly and customers on the card were able to pay their accounts promptly. The loss of the card affects my business. The kids are not wearing clean, suitable clothing; they don't have shoes on, they don't get Christmas presents and our theft rate has gone up. People with no money have no option other than to steal.</para>
<para>The removal of the Indue card had a massive impact on Ceduna township, it was like flicking a switch and the antisocial behaviour escalated immediately. Since the Indue card ceased, we have seen a rapid decline in our business due to escalating violence and verbal abuse.'</para>
<para>And on loss of faith: 'We've had a number of businesses thinking about shutting down, with one hairdresser already calling it quits and shutting down due to the issues. There will be a number of others if things don't improve soon.'</para>
<para>I've asked the minister, in writing, to come to Ceduna unannounced. I'm willing to accompany her when we go and discuss these issues with the more than 30 businesses and people that have contacted me from Ceduna. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SCRYMGOUR</name>
    <name.id>F2S</name.id>
    <electorate>Lingiari</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I acknowledge that it has been interesting to sit here and listen to the member for Durack, who, like me, probably has one of the largest seats in this federal parliament. My seat of Lingiari is 1.1 million square kilometres. It covers 76 remote communities and 500 homelands in the Northern Territory. It stretches from the saltwater country in the Top End—all of the Top End coast—to the deserts of Central Australia. And it has many regional towns: Katherine, Tennant Creek and Alice Springs. I was listening to the member for Grey and to some of the issues he was highlighting in places like Ceduna. I was the national head of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander programs for the Australian Red Cross, travelling to some of these communities and working in places like Port Hedland and Ceduna to have a look at how we get better solutions and outcomes for people. A lot of these issues have been long-term and communities have struggled for a long time with coming up with solutions. But when you do have communities that have solutions to a lot of these problems, often it needs government to listen to what those solutions are. For too long we have seen complete deafness or ignorance on the side of governments in terms of looking at what the solutions are. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 13:30 to 16:00</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</title>
        <page.no>148</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fowler Electorate: Schools</title>
          <page.no>148</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LE</name>
    <name.id>295676</name.id>
    <electorate>Fowler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I have been visiting many schools within our Fowler electorate to present my leadership awards, also known as the 'believe and achieve' awards, to select the students in recognition of their resilience and grit in the pursuit of knowledge and learning. I also paid a visit to our inclusive schools, such as Mainsbridge in Warwick Farm, Les Powell School in Mount Pritchard, Verona School in Canley Vale and Fairfield East, and Lawrence Hargrave School in Liverpool. I can't tell you how inspired and touched I was seeing the dedication of our teachers and carers striving to provide the best learning environment for the young students and their families. These amazing teachers play such a pivotal role in shaping the future for students, especially those with disabilities, behavioural disorders and mental health illnesses. I saw first-hand how dedicated and committed they were, working tirelessly to accommodate the diverse needs of their students, and in a challenging environment such as staff shortages and lack of funding, especially for infrastructure such as air conditioning when working from demountables.</para>
<para>Governments federal and state should look at the future of education overall and prioritise the needs of schools in lower socioeconomic areas such as Fowler and Western Sydney so that students receive the education and opportunities they need to thrive, be productive and become empowered citizens of this nation. Once again, thank you to all the teachers in Fowler for your commitment and hard work to support our diverse community. Please note that your passion and hard work do not go unnoticed.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gilmore Electorate: Agricultural Shows</title>
          <page.no>148</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs PHILLIPS</name>
    <name.id>147140</name.id>
    <electorate>Gilmore</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It is that time of year again; ag show season is upon us. Agricultural shows offer a delightful opportunity to celebrate the distinct character of our communities, where everything from poultry and cattle to locally grown produce and home-made preserves take centre stage. At the Berry show, I had the pleasure to chat with members from the Berry Show Society, whose selfless contributions make the show the success it is.</para>
<para>At the Eurobodalla show, I joined the grand parade while being driven in style by Graham, president of the Eurobodalla classic and vintage motor club. At the Kiama show, I was the proud sponsor of Matilda's Farmyard Nursery, which proved to be very popular. I sponsor all our local shows every year. At the Nowra show, I assisted the Nowra Rotary volunteers at the gate by checking wristbands and, naturally, I couldn't resist in indulging in a delicious Dagwood dog. The Kangaroo Valley, the 'friendly show', lived up to its name. I had the pleasure of helping to open the show and to honour local community champion Lorraine Mairinger OAM for her contributions to the Kangaroo Valley community. I spent most of my time admiring the magnificent entries and exhibits—I am a farmer's daughter after all! It has been a busy few weeks, but I look forward to attending the Milton show this weekend. These shows would not be possible without the hard work of our show societies and volunteers. Congratulations to absolutely everyone who showcased their hard work over the year.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Boosting Female Founders Initiative</title>
          <page.no>148</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STEGGALL</name>
    <name.id>175696</name.id>
    <electorate>Warringah</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I congratulate two female owned-businesses in Warringah who were successful in the Boosting Female Founders Initiative: Lactamo Holdings for their successful funding to respond to international demand for their breastfeeding massage ball, and Meditati for the commercialisation of their tampon innovation. The boosting female founders grant has nevertheless been challenging for many, with delays and poor communication leading to many applicants and grant recipients incurring unnecessary costs. Applicants have described this grant as 'breaking female founders' and 'a slap in the face'. One of my constituents, Emma Jones, of Project F, is one of the many applicants who has had a negative business impact due to the poor communication and lapsed time lines in the grants. So even successful applicants have said the process has undermined their business and cash flow.</para>
<para>We must do better when private sector investors overwhelmingly support all-male start-ups, with only four per cent of funding going to all-female start-ups and 62 per cent going to all-male teams in 2023, so the gap still has a long way to go to be closed. So I call on the government to do more to support female entrepreneurs, particularly in the upcoming budget. It's really important that this grant program for boosting female founders delivers on its promise and expectation and boosts women in business.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Grocery Prices</title>
          <page.no>149</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEMPLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>181810</name.id>
    <electorate>Macquarie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We all know that a basket of groceries at the check-out is costing more. In our view, Woolies and Coles have excessive market power—a concentration of power—and that means prices are higher than they should be. In other parts of the country we hear about a duopoly, but in small communities like mine there's typically only one place to shop. Now, unlike the previous government, we're not going to shrug our shoulders and say, 'Oh well, so sad.' We're going to look for ways to make things fairer, and that's why there are three inquiries currently underway. One is in the Senate, looking at a wide range of supermarket issues. We've also directed the ACCC to conduct an inquiry into the pricing practices of the supermarkets and the relationship between wholesale and retail prices. And the third inquiry is headed by former Labor competition minister and economist, Dr Craig Emerson.</para>
<para>We also know that farmers say they're getting less for their produce, but that it hasn't really led to cheaper prices for consumers. We think it should, and we think there should be transparency through the entire supply chain so that when people do their weekly shop, they're not shocked at the costs they're facing. The three reviews we're doing are absolutely essential to give consumers a fair go at the check-out. We'll look at every option to put downward pressure on prices so that both families and farmers get a fair go.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bowman Electorate: Telecommunications</title>
          <page.no>149</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PIKE</name>
    <name.id>300120</name.id>
    <electorate>Bowman</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>A key priority for me is to secure improved mobile phone reception within the Redlands. It's an area of acute concern to many locals in the mainland suburbs as well as in our Bay Islands. In today's digital age, having reliable mobile service is not a luxury but a necessity. When phone reception is patchy or failing, it can have a significant impact on our businesses, families and lives.</para>
<para>I'm pleased to report that progress is being made to improve mobile reception throughout the Redlands. Through my collaboration with service providers, we've seen 28 mobile network improvements and upgrades from Optus, Telstra and Vodafone across the Redlands. On the islands in my electorate, these mobile coverage issues are even more pressing. Russell Island is home to an Optus tower funded by the previous coalition government. Unfortunately, due to recent wild weather over the summer, we have seen significant issues with this infrastructure, including a totally unacceptable situation where residents could not call triple 0. I met with senior Optus executives to discuss this recently and to push for a solution. I'm pleased to report that a new battery will be installed at the tower within the next few weeks to ensure that these failures will not be repeated.</para>
<para>No matter where Redlanders choose to live, they should have access to good mobile coverage. I'd like to thank all those who have reached out to me on this important issue, including the over 2,500 who responded to a recent survey of mine in relation to identifying mobile blackspots.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Medicare</title>
          <page.no>149</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr GARLAND</name>
    <name.id>295588</name.id>
    <electorate>Chisholm</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Recently, we celebrated the 40th anniversary of Medicare—a proud Labor legacy. This Labor government is protecting and strengthening Medicare, because we care about the health of all Australians.</para>
<para>By tripling the Medicare rebate, we've ensured that it's easier and cheaper to see a doctor. In Chisholm, this has resulted in hundreds of extra bulk-billing services and patient savings approaching $20,000 in only two months. Across Victoria, this has resulted in more than 71,000 extra bulk-billing services and close to $3 million in savings. I'm also pleased to say that Chisholm very nearly tops the nation for the most 60-day dispensing scripts in Australia. That's almost 25,000 scripts benefiting patients in my electorate and putting money back into their pockets.</para>
<para>I know from community feedback that these changes are making a big difference in my community. And Australians know that it's only Labor who will protect Medicare. As the local member, I will always be its champion in Chisholm.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Smibert, Mr Kelvin</title>
          <page.no>149</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PASIN</name>
    <name.id>240756</name.id>
    <electorate>Barker</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On behalf of the Mount Gambier community and the broader Limestone Coast, I'd like to pay tribute to the life of the late Kelvin Smibert.</para>
<para>Kelvin was a member of Australia's greatest generation. From 1942 to 1946, Kelvin served as a Royal Australian Navy telegraphist. He was one of one million personnel who served under our flag, defending our country, our values and, quite frankly, our future. After his wartime service, Kelvin took up a soldier's settlement block at Poolaijelo before retiring close to Mount Gambier in 1988.</para>
<para>Kelvin was well known in Mount Gambier for the production of handmade art paper at Blue Lake Papermill. He was also an avid author and launched his book at the Mount Gambier Library titled, <inline font-style="italic">W</inline><inline font-style="italic">ho is Bill Jackson?</inline> In his later years, he enjoyed 3D modelling of Aboriginal cave art.</para>
<para>The Limestone Coast is richer for Kelvin's contributions and passion both for art and the geology of the region. Kelvin also selflessly donated multiple artworks, including from his own collection, to the Mount Gambier hospital to brighten the spaces at that facility. Kelvin was by nature a true community man who inspired and enriched the lives of many. He was a pioneer who will be deeply missed within the Limestone Coast community. Vale Kelvin Smibert.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Hockey Australia Indoor Hockey Championships</title>
          <page.no>150</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DAVID SMITH</name>
    <name.id>276714</name.id>
    <electorate>Bean</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last month the 2024 Hockey Australia Indoor Hockey Championships were held here in our capital. I'm pleased to report that the ACT became the champions of the women's open national indoor hockey. This is the first time that the capital has taken the title and it's a long-awaited victory for many team members.</para>
<para>The team attributes their success to hard work and a positive team environment. The unity and team spirit of the ACT women's open team was also rewarded with the league's Play the Whistle award, which celebrates exceptional sportsmanship on the pitch. Their success on both of these fronts demonstrates that fostering a safe and supportive culture helps players to shine individually and as a team. I congratulate everyone on the ACT side, including the efforts of the many Bean residents on the team: Reita Holmes, Emma Taylor, Laura Monterosso, Rebecca Hotchkis, Gabrielle Millan and Brooke Suitor. Their drive, commitment and team solidarity are a fantastic example of the southside spirit that we all aim to embody.</para>
<para>Congratulations once again to everyone in the ACT hockey community on the team's victory. I wish the team all luck with the seasons to come.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>RSL Women's Auxiliary Tasmania State Branch</title>
          <page.no>150</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PEARCE</name>
    <name.id>282306</name.id>
    <electorate>Braddon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It was my absolute honour to open the Tasmanian RSL women's auxiliary 75th annual conference in Ulverstone on the weekend. Founded in 1949, the organisation has been unwavering in its commitment to supporting our veterans, our veterans' families, current serving members in war zones and peacekeeping peace enforcement missions over many years. Many hundreds of thousands of dollars have been raised in support of causes, both overseas and domestically. They include, but are not limited to, Camp Quality, Legacy and fire and flood appeals, as well as funding a University of Tasmania bursary for the benefit of descendants of returned servicemen and women.</para>
<para>I was overwhelmed at the number of quality delegates at the meeting on Sunday, many of whom I've developed a great respect for over many years. The conference is a wonderful opportunity for those members to come together to renew lifelong friendships and forge new ones, as well as discussing important issues that affect veterans, sharing their experiences and recognising their many significant achievements.</para>
<para>You should be incredibly proud, ladies, of reaching your diamond anniversary milestone. I look forward to celebrating many more with you and supporting you in future years.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bangka Day Memorial Service</title>
          <page.no>150</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MILLER-FROST</name>
    <name.id>296272</name.id>
    <electorate>Boothby</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>'Chin up, girls. I'm proud of you and I love you all.' These were the last words of Matron Irene Drummond as she and 21 other Australian nurses were marched into the sea at Radji Beach, Bangka Island, and the machine guns fired on them. Only one survived. Many terrible fates awaited survivors of the SS<inline font-style="italic">Vyner Brooke</inline> shipwreck. Bangka Day commemorates the fate of the Australian nurses. I recently represented the Minister for Veterans' Affairs, Matt Keogh, at Bangka Day for the 82nd commemoration of the massacre.</para>
<para>The Women’s Memorial Playing Fields in my electorate looks over Adelaide to the sea, and is an appropriately reflective place to honour the sacrifice made by the Australian nurses. Twenty-one shining silver poles stand tall—one for each of the nurses who died that day. One shining gold pole represents Sister Vivian Bullwinkel, the sole survivor, who came back to tell of their deaths. I would like to thank Helen Fischer, the President of the Women's Memorial Playing Fields Trust, Sturt Devils lacrosse team, the Flinders United Women's Football Club, RSL SA, the 3rd Health Support Battalion and the Army band for the service and the commemoration event, and Dr Annette Summers AO RFD, who gave this year's oration. Lest we forget.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Casey Electorate: Community Events</title>
          <page.no>151</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VIOLI</name>
    <name.id>300147</name.id>
    <electorate>Casey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>There are many beautiful parts of my electorate of Casey, and one in particular that I'd like to talk about today is the wonderful Upper Yarra. I had a chance in the last week to spend some time at quite a few community events, including the general meeting for the Community Economic Development Association at the Carriage Cafe in Seville. It was a wonderful chance to hear from the Cog Bike Cafe on how they're using bike tracks to drive economic development in our area and, importantly, to engage the community.</para>
<para>It was also wonderful to hear from Kate at ADRA, which does such important work supporting those who are less fortunate to make sure they have food and social connection. Congratulations to the new CEDA president, Anna Tehan. I look forward to working with her in the committee as they go from strength to strength.</para>
<para>But what is great about CEDA is that they deliberately have community in their name, and it's about helping others. I want to give a shout-out to one of their members, a well-known Wandin local, Norman Orr. I had the pleasure to open the Eastern 80 bike ride, where he raises funds for the Royal Children's Hospital. This year was the ninth year and they raised $90,000. Next year, their 10th year, we're aiming for $100,000. Congratulations to Norm and the team at Eastern 80.</para>
<para>Last Thursday, I had the opportunity to see Suyin and the Koha Community Cafe. I served a little bit of food and, while my hospitality skills were poor, I could see the social connection of those that had a chance to catch up and talk to each other in a place where they felt safe and secure.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Jagajaga Electorate: Small Businesses</title>
          <page.no>151</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms THWAITES</name>
    <name.id>282212</name.id>
    <electorate>Jagajaga</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I love supporting small business in my community, and it has been a pleasure to spend a lot of time with the traders in Macleod recently, such as people like Frank and Helen Ciccone, who have operated their well-known hair salon for 25 years now. My mum and I were long-time regulars there. Two years ago, they made the move across the train line to McNamara Street and have helped to build a new strip of shops, which they call 'the runway on McNamara'. Thanks to all the businesses at the runway who welcomed me for a visit last week: Frank, Helen, Georgia, Claudia and the crew at Hair Ciccone; Enaksha, Carmen, Karla, Jess and Megan from the speech pathology centre; Maria from Divine Bridal; and Chris and Simon from Hey Sunshine Cafe.</para>
<para>I visited Macleod again on Friday for my latest 'Coffee with Kate', a chance for locals to meet with me and talk about their priorities. Our government's tax cuts were certainly top of mind in the conversations I had, as well as supporting our local environment, our local access to health care and a number other issues. Thanks to Ned and the team at Mr Macleod for the great coffees for that event.</para>
<para>Finally, a shout-out to Nuri, Claire and the team at General Chicken Co., who are a great help, particularly recently with their delicious food for a picnic I held for local supporters. It is wonderful to have so many wonderful local businesses in Jagajaga. I will keep supporting them, and I know our community values everything that they do.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cost of Living</title>
          <page.no>151</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PITT</name>
    <name.id>148150</name.id>
    <electorate>Hinkler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Taylor Swift phenomenon is everywhere, but I am going to give a shout-out to Travis Kelce, who happened to win a Super Bowl a couple of weeks ago. Welcome to Australia!</para>
<para>The Prime Minister himself, of course, showed up at a Ms Swift concert—but I've got to say, he's no Swiftie; he's just shifty. Look at the broken promises. I say to all Australian people: he is just no good for you. Why do you keep on going back to the broken promises and the cost of living? But we are never, ever getting that back together. This Labor government is just bad to the bone when it comes to electricity promises; where is the $275? A wrecking ball has gone through mortgage costs. I tell you, I heard on the grapevine that promises on superannuation and franking credits were also broken. That's more broken promises from this Labor government.</para>
<para>So I say to the Australian people: we know breaking up is hard to do, but, if you do not break up with the Labor government, they are coming with changes to negative gearing. They are coming to tax the family home and they are coming with death duties. You only have to look at the appointment of an individual to run the Productivity Commission who just two weeks earlier was calling for death duties in this country to know what this Labor government will do. It is more taxes, higher taxes, out of every Australian's pocket.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Werriwa Electorate: Consumer Protections</title>
          <page.no>151</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STANLEY</name>
    <name.id>265990</name.id>
    <electorate>Werriwa</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Unfortunately, scams have become a regular occurrence in all of our lives. I'm often approached by constituents telling me they've received suspicious texts and phone calls and have been affected by scams. Scams are costing Australians a staggering $3.1 billion a year.</para>
<para>Last week I had the pleasure of hosting a community scams forum of over 50 people with the Hon. Stephen Jones as guest speaker. It was a fantastic opportunity for residents of Werriwa to learn how to recognise a scam, protect themselves and react if they think they've been scammed and ask important questions. We must all adapt in the face of these growing and complex scams, both on an individual level and also as a society and as a government, and remember that you're not at fault, because they can be very convincing.</para>
<para>I know the assistant minister is working hard to find solutions for the scams that are happening every day in our community and in communities all around Australia. And I'd really like to thank him and all members of my community for coming to the scams forum. My office still has a number of copies of <inline font-style="italic">The Little Black Book of Scams</inline>, so, if you'd like to get in contact with us, we are more than happy to send one out or talk to you about any concerns that you might have.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Durack Electorate: Rescue Helicopter</title>
          <page.no>152</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PRICE</name>
    <name.id>249308</name.id>
    <electorate>Durack</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to talk today about a recent decision of the WA state Labor government to reject the establishment of an emergency rescue helicopter based in Geraldton, which is the largest regional population base in the electorate of Durack.</para>
<para>Currently, not one emergency helicopter exists in Durack or, indeed, anywhere in WA north of Perth. Geraldton Hospital does not have an ICU; therefore, patients are frequently flown to Perth for care. For the past six years Geraldton marine rescue volunteer Ian Dempsey, alongside local community groups, has worked incredibly hard to campaign for this essential service. Their efforts culminated in a community petition, tabled in state parliament and supported by an inquiry, highlighting the critical need for such a facility in our region. Yet despite the overwhelming evidence and community outcry, our voices have been dismissed, leaving us feeling neglected once again.</para>
<para>This decision underscores the city-centric approach of the Cook Labor government, where regional lives appear to be less important. Medical emergencies wait for no-one—as you know, Mr Deputy Speaker Young—and the absence of a dedicated rescue helicopter puts my Mid West constituents' lives at greater risk. I implore the state government to reconsider their decision and prioritise the safety and wellbeing of all Western Australians, regardless of their postcode.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Petition: Middle East</title>
          <page.no>152</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms VAMVAKINOU</name>
    <name.id>00AMT</name.id>
    <electorate>Calwell</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I table a petition.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>201906</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The document will be forwarded to the Standing Committee on Petitions for its consideration. It will be accepted subject to confirmation by the committee that it conforms to the standing orders.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms VAMVAKINOU</name>
    <name.id>00AMT</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>This is a petition that has attracted close to 15,000 signatures both here in Australia and worldwide. It's the initiative of my 14-year-old constituent Ammar Mahmoud, who lives in Mickleham in my electorate, and was established on change.org. The petition addresses the ongoing conflict in blockading Gaza, where close to 30,000 innocent civilians have been killed, mostly women and children, and calls for an immediate ceasefire. The petition also calls on the Australian government to lead diplomatic initiatives to promote a peaceful resolution to the conflict and an increase in the permanent allocation of humanitarian aid. Young Ammar has been deeply concerned about the situation in Gaza and has been inspired to act, in the form of this petition.</para>
<para>I'd like to quote Ammar Mahmoud, who I spoke to recently, before tabling this petition: 'As a 14-year-old it is both heartbreaking and unimaginable that I find myself in a position where I have to demand my country stop the violence and genocide against children my age and way younger. It is a stark reality that makes us all wonder what has gotten into our human world.' I thank Ammar for his initiative. I know that, on this occasion, on the issue of the situation in Gaza, Ammar speaks for a large proportion of my electorate.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Grey Electorate: Tod Highway</title>
          <page.no>152</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RAMSEY</name>
    <name.id>HWS</name.id>
    <electorate>Grey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm disappointed, but not surprised, at the communication from the South Australia's transport department to the Lower Eyre Peninsula Council that the proposed and approved passing lanes on the Tod Highway south of Cummins are not going ahead because—guess what? They've run out of money, despite the fact that the previous government allocated a significant resource to Eyre Peninsula to deal with the closure of EP rail. It seems they've had numerous failures with projects—this is all managed by DTI in South Australia—and the contractors have been happy to go back again and again. For one particular intersection they're on the third rebuild at the moment.</para>
<para>This comes at a time when we're seeing resources being dragged away from support for regional roads. We've lost the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program. The Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity Program is gone. The Bridges Renewal Program, which was only announced a couple of weeks ago, has gone. We are currently building dual lanes on the state's No. 1 priority project between Port Wakefield and Port Augusta. The previous government allocated $210 million of the 80-20 deal, and there's nothing in the forward estimates. There's nothing at all in the forward estimates, so it's quite clear that when the previous government's money runs out that will end. We are being gutted.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Holt Electorate: International Mother Language Day, Community Language Schools</title>
          <page.no>153</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms FERNANDO</name>
    <name.id>299964</name.id>
    <electorate>Holt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I was proud to host International Mother Language Day celebrations in my office last Wednesday. This gathering brought together representatives from community language schools that engage with my electorate, each of which contributes to the richness of our nation with its own unique tone. The event was an opportunity to acknowledge the crucial role these schools play in preserving and promoting the many languages besides English that are spoken in my electorate—all 161 of them.</para>
<para>Community language schools provide a space where new and future generations can connect with their language, nurture their cultural identity and foster a sense of belonging. I would like to thank the following schools for making this event a grand success: Andisha Community Language School; Cranbourne Gyanjyoti Pathsala; Payam Dari language school; the Macedonian Teachers Association of Victoria; Sankalp-Ek Nishchay Marathi school; VSL Kannada school; VTA Tamil School; and Zimbabwe Community in Australia Victoria. I commend the staff and volunteers who dedicate their efforts so that future generations can connect with their roots and maintain a strong connection to their cultural heritage.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Logue, Mr Lionel George, CVO</title>
          <page.no>153</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr STEVENS</name>
    <name.id>176304</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today, 26 February, is the anniversary of the birth of one of my more famous former constituents—in fact, he was never a constituent of mine, personally—Mr Lionel Logue, who was a very famous speech pathologist. He was born in my electorate and grew up in College Park. His grandfather is also very famous in my electorate for having established the Kent Town Brewery.</para>
<para>Mr Logue travelled to Perth, after completing his studies at Adelaide university's music school, and then became a self-taught speech pathologist. He was not welcomed by the establishment, particularly in the United Kingdom, but he perfected his techniques by assisting World War I veterans who had suffered significant speech deprivation from shellshock and other traumatic experiences in the First World War.</para>
<para>His most famous patient was the Duke of York, who became King George VI, who had a very significant speech stammer. It was Lionel Logue who provided him with invaluable support and therapy to be able to make some of the very important addresses that he had to in his time, particularly when he ascended the throne in 1937 and during those critical World War II times when the people of the Empire needed to hear from their monarch. I pay tribute to Lionel Logue for that contribution.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19: Social Distance and Loneliness</title>
          <page.no>153</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PERRETT</name>
    <name.id>HVP</name.id>
    <electorate>Moreton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Our social landscape has changed dramatically thanks to COVID-19. We all remember the days of social distancing and avoiding crowded places. The days of enforced distancing are over, but, ironically, what many people are left with now is social distance. Another name for that is loneliness. Last year's <inline font-style="italic">S</inline><inline font-style="italic">tate of the </inline><inline font-style="italic">N</inline><inline font-style="italic">ation</inline> report reported that nearly one in three Australians feel lonely. Loneliness is by no means a new problem, but the changes to our society wrought by COVID-19 have resulted in loneliness flowing for new reasons. Many people work from home, isolated from colleagues, university students attend lectures online from home, and our curated social media life fills the place of messy real-life interactions.</para>
<para>Last week I hosted a loneliness roundtable with the members for Boothby and Hunter. We were joined by some of the amazing community groups in Moreton—St David's Neighbourhood Centre, Sherwood Neighbourhood Centre, Acacia Ridge Community Centre, Kyabra, Support Groups Queensland, the Annerley Baptist Church and the Filipino-Australian Foundation. Their feedback reflected what I learnt during my 'Say G'Day in May' program, when I walked around my electorate back in 2018 highlighting loneliness. People want to connect with others, it's in our DNA, and governments need to find ways to make that easier. We need to strengthen the capacity of our community groups to provide multiple entry points to their valuable programs. We need to attract volunteers back and we need to provide services where people go in their busy lives—for example, using schools.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Indi Electorate: Violet Town Women in War Memorial Mural</title>
          <page.no>153</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr HAINES</name>
    <name.id>282335</name.id>
    <electorate>Indi</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>With great pride, I recently joined more than 300 community members at the Violet Town RSL sub-branch for the unveiling of the Women in War memorial mural, a project conceived in 2019 by RSL member Jenni Kennedy to honour local women who have served during times of war. The scope of the project evolved, with the mural now reflecting the diversity of roles that women have undertaken within Australia's defence forces over time, from World Wars I and II to the Korean and Vietnam wars—as nurses, doctors, peacekeepers, fighter pilots and tank drivers—and reflecting the first women to hold significant military ranks. Warrant officer Kim Felmingham NSC OAM, the first female regimental sergeant major of the Army, who features in the mural, spoke passionately at the unveiling about how the leadership of women in defence is progressing.</para>
<para>Benalla based artist Tim Bowtell and his son Sam painted the mural from historical photographs. The artwork is 17 metres long and almost two metres high. It has been supported by and contributed to by so many in the community. The mural will be a lasting legacy that honours the memory and dedication of women who have served our country, and the people of Violet Town should feel very proud about what they've achieved together by bringing this project to life. Congratulations to all involved! This is not only a significant memorial and attraction; it's an inspiration to young women everywhere dreaming about how they, too, can serve their country.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Spence Electorate: Liverpool Football Club Academy</title>
          <page.no>154</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURNELL</name>
    <name.id>300129</name.id>
    <electorate>Spence</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>As a long-time supporter of Chelsea Football Club, it gives me no pleasure to announce this news to the House, especially after hearing the result of the Carabao Cup final, which took place in the early hours of the morning, our time. However, as a proud local member, it gives me a great deal of pride to announce the recent partnership between Xavier College and Liverpool Football Club. Xavier College has two of its three campuses in my electorate of Spence, in Gawler Belt and in Evanston. Their third campus, in Two Wells, is just over the border in the electorate of Grey.</para>
<para>The establishment of a Liverpool Football Club International Academy at Xavier has additional benefits by way of further partnership with the Australian College of Physical Education, making Xavier a destination for those looking to pursue PE or football at an elite level.</para>
<para>Xavier have highlighted, from the get-go, the benefits this partnership can have, not just for the school but for the local community. These benefits include access to high-performance training facilities, access for children and young adults in the community to a national network of academies, and also an international connection to Anfield.</para>
<para>While seeing Liverpool at the top of the table after losing out on the EFL cup just hours ago does hurt a little, at least there are more kids in Spence being instilled with the creed 'You'll never walk alone.' I thank the House.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Housing</title>
          <page.no>154</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SUKKAR</name>
    <name.id>242515</name.id>
    <electorate>Deakin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>If you thought Labor's housing crisis was bad in 2023, it's getting worse in 2024 and it will get worse in the years to come. Under the Labor government—20 months later—we have fewer homes being built than we've seen for over a decade. We have fewer first home buyers than since the Gillard government. We have fewer approvals than we've seen for over a decade, and the answer from this government is a scheme to replicate shared equity—Help to Buy—when every single state, bar one, around this country already has a shared equity scheme. These schemes are so unloved that, in New South Wales, for example, 94 per cent of shared-equity places remain available, because nobody wants them. In the midst of a housing crisis created by Labor and their migration program, the answer is to create more shared-equity places out of this parliament for a product that Australians have already shown that they do not want. Only six per cent of the places in the New South Wales scheme were taken, so the geniuses in the government here decided to create another 10,000 places per year. These are places that, quite frankly, Australians do not want. Australians want to own their own home, they want support from this government and they don't want to be crowded out by half a million new migrants with no plan on housing them.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Weiss, Mr Denis</title>
          <page.no>154</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr REID</name>
    <name.id>300126</name.id>
    <electorate>Robertson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to commend Mr Denis Weiss of Copacabana, who has been recognised for his 50 years of service to public education in New South Wales. Mr Weiss first started his teaching career in 1968 at Villawood North Public School, where he put into practice his newly learnt knowledge and teaching methods. Over the past 50 years, he has taught at several other public schools across the state, including on the Central Coast at Narara Public School. Now, as assistant principal, he helps lead and guide education at Narara Public School, a tremendous local school in my electorate of Robertson. He was recognised for his 50 years of service at the inaugural New South Wales Department of Education Service Recognition Dinner in late 2023. Here the New South Wales education minister thanked and congratulated 59 other teachers who have had 50 years or more of service in public education.</para>
<para>I would like to take this opportunity to thank and congratulate Mr Denis Weiss for his commitment and dedication to public education. You are what makes public education great. Your contributions have helped inspire and nurture thousands of students over five decades. Teachers are remarkable individuals who make our communities so much stronger through their work. To all teachers: thank you for your service to the great state of New South Wales and to the nation more broadly.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Victoria: Bushfires</title>
          <page.no>155</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
    <electorate>Wannon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Over the last two weeks, we've seen the tragedy of fire hit western Victoria. At Pomonal 46 houses were lost, sadly, and over the last few days in and around Beaufort we've seen six homes and other property lost. Sheds and livestock have been lost. I've just got to say thank you to all the emergency services who have been out there actively keeping our communities safe. They've done an extraordinary job. The fact that we've had no loss of life is all thanks to their herculean efforts. They've done an absolutely outstanding job. There's still a lot of work to do in protecting the communities going forward. On Wednesday, there is another code red day that has been forecast. The fire will not be out in and around Beaufort, but there's work going on to try and get that fire under control.</para>
<para>I'd just like, on behalf of the parliament, to thank everyone who's been putting in that tireless effort to keep the community safe. There are those out on the fire front. There are those flying by air dropping retardant and water onto the fire. There are those who are providing the food. There are those who are working in the shelters to feed people who have to evacuate their homes. It's just an all-round community effort to keep people safe. I give a heartfelt thank you to you all.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Petition: Lambton Post Office</title>
          <page.no>155</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CLAYDON</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
    <electorate>Newcastle</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to relay the concerns of my community about the imminent closure of the Lambton post office. The Lambton community is calling on Australia Post to reverse its plans to close the Elder Street service on 1 May. I share the grave concerns of my constituents. Postal services are essential services, providing access to vital services and connecting communities across the country. The residents of Lambton know this, which is why they're fighting to keep this post office open.</para>
<para>My constituents are deeply distressed by this pending closure, including the brilliant Wallabies, preschool children who attend the Elder Street Early Childhood Centre just round the corner. Their educator, Bree Creighton, told me: 'The children are extremely saddened by the decision to close our Lambton post office.' The children regularly take excursions to learn about our postal services and the system provided. Loula, aged three, wrote with concern that her dear friend Violet won't be able to send letters to her grandmother, who lives in America. 'They can't close it,' she said. 'How will Violet send letters to Mami Letty anymore?'</para>
<para>I want to thank Violet and the almost 4,000 people who have signed this petition or have contacted me directly about the importance of keeping the Lambton post office open. I'll be making formal representations to the Minister for Communications and to Australia Post on keeping our community postal services open and running. I seek leave to table this community petition.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>201906</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Has the petition been approved by the Petitions Committee?</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CLAYDON</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It has not.</para>
<para>Leave granted.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>201906</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The document will be forwarded to the Petitions Committee for its consideration and will be accepted subject to confirmation by the committee that it conforms with standing orders.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Herbert Electorate: Health Care</title>
          <page.no>155</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr THOMPSON</name>
    <name.id>281826</name.id>
    <electorate>Herbert</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Accessing affordable health care should not be impossible; it's a basic human right. However, seeing a GP for a bulk-billing appointment is moving from a necessity to a luxury. According to newly released data compiled by Cleanbill, Herbert remains one of the most expensive federal electorates in the country to see a GP in. Local bulk-billing rates have declined by 10.5 per cent on last year, and out-of-pocket charges continue to climb. This data makes it clear that the government's solutions are not working.</para>
<para>The Urgent Care Clinic in Townsville is not working. The Urgent Care Clinic opening was delayed by seven months, and it was clear then that the government did not consider Townsville a priority. Constituents continue to contact me on a daily basis, telling me how hard it is for them to see a bulk-billing clinic. Staff in our emergency department in Townsville general hospital haven't felt the easing of pressure on their services that they were promised, as the Urgent Care Clinic continues to turn people away after experiencing wait times of several hours. This is an absolute failure.</para>
<para>In a cost-of-living crisis, the situation continues to go from bad to worse for the people of Townsville. We need to attract GPs to our area and we need to support them so they can deliver high-quality bulk-billing services to our local community.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Hasluck Electorate: School Funding</title>
          <page.no>155</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LAWRENCE</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
    <electorate>Hasluck</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>When you hear the politics and law students at Guildford Grammar School mercilessly drill multiple questions at the Attorney-General about the need for the new Administrative Review Tribunal, then you know that their teachers are doing a great job! Thanks go to the principal, Peter Allen, and his team for our visit last Thursday. The Attorney-General enjoyed himself.</para>
<para>When you're guided around Chidlow Primary School by student leaders Savannah and Layla, showing their confidence and pride in their school's tailored spelling program and their beautiful library, then you know that the school is in good hands. I acknowledge the great work of principal, Amanda McCormack, and her staff. And when you meet the new principal at Swan View Primary School, Jemima Tomlinson, and hear her plans to set targets for the school and for each class to aspire towards, then you know that achievement will follow.</para>
<para>I visited these schools, knowing that the Albanese and the Cook Labor governments have already come to an historic agreement for funding public schools in Western Australia to 100 per cent of the SRS. We recognise that it shouldn't matter where you were born or the economic circumstances of your parents, because every child requires, and is entitled to, an excellent education in this country. Funding isn't the only answer to that, as evidenced by the magnificent teaching and leadership at these schools that I've just referred to, but it is part of the answer and we, the Albanese Labor government, are delivering on it.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Forde Electorate: Australia Day Awards</title>
          <page.no>156</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VAN MANEN</name>
    <name.id>188315</name.id>
    <electorate>Forde</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's with great pleasure that I rise today to highlight the work of Forde's 2024 Australia Day honours and awards recipients. Two local recipients were awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia, and congratulations must go to Belinda Adams OAM and Kathleen Neehouse OAM. Belinda received her honour for service to community health. A brain injury advocate, Belinda has been an ambassador for neurological support and research organisations such as Synapse and the Hopkins Centre for over a decade. In 2019, she founded Banging the Drum for Brain Injury, a regional stroke rehabilitation program involving drumming.</para>
<para>Kathleen's service to youth through Girl Guides was recognised with her award. Kathleen has been an integral part of Girl Guides Queensland since she became a state trainer in 1976, and she was recognised with 50 years of adult membership by Girl Guides Australia in 2021. She has supported the growth and development of generations of young Queensland women.</para>
<para>The Australian Fire Service Medal was awarded to local Chambers Flat Rural Fire Brigade volunteer, David Heck. David commenced his firefighting duties in 1993 and has taken on numerous frontline roles across Queensland in his three decades of service.</para>
<para>Congratulations to all three of Forde's incredibly worthy recipients in 2024.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Senior, Lt Col. Robert Clive</title>
          <page.no>156</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LAXALE</name>
    <name.id>299174</name.id>
    <electorate>Bennelong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today, I rise to pay tribute to the remarkable life and enduring legacy of Robert Clive Senior, a distinguished veteran, an esteemed community leader and beloved family man, who passed away 13 December 2023. Rob Senior's journey began in Sydney, where he received his education and embarked on a career of service to his country. Joining the Australian Army in 1969, Robert served with distinction for 26 years, rising to the rank of lieutenant colonel. His dedication, expertise and leadership left an indelible mark on our armed forces.</para>
<para>After retiring from the military, Rob continued his commitment to public service through his work in urban planning and consulting. His contributions to strategic infrastructure planning in New South Wales were profound, shaping the development of our state for the better. Beyond his professional achievements, Rob was a pillar of his community in West Ryde. His selfless volunteer work touched countless lives, from Meals on Wheels to community choirs, reflecting his deep compassion and generosity of spirit. Our community is better because of Rob's service to it.</para>
<para>Rob's diagnosis of motor neurone disease in August 2023 was met with courage and resilience. Though his battle with the illness was brief, his legacy and service and kindness will endure for generations to come. Though he may no longer be with us, his legacy lives on in the hearts of his loved ones and the countless lives he touched throughout his lifetime. Vale, Robert Clive Senior.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>201906</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</title>
        <page.no>156</page.no>
        <type>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Ukraine</title>
          <page.no>156</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WALLACE</name>
    <name.id>265967</name.id>
    <electorate>Fisher</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>At the request of Mr Leeser, I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) that February 2024 marks two years since Russia's illegal and immoral invasion of Ukraine;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the Ukrainian people continue to show strength, determination and courage in defending their land and resisting Russia's unlawful invasion;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the decision in September 2023 of the Government to retire the MRH-90 Taipan helicopters following the loss of four lives during a training accident; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) the request of the Ukrainian Government in late 2023 for Australia to donate the MRH-90 Taipan helicopters to assist in its ongoing war efforts to defend their homeland;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) expresses concern regarding the:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) decision of the Government to bring forward its program of dismantling of the MRH-90 Taipan helicopters;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) Government's weak and too-little, too-late response to requests for assistance from the government of Ukraine; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) failure of the Government to maintain the former Government's record of delivering a comprehensive package of support that established Australia as the largest non-NATO contributor to Ukraine; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) calls on the Government to demonstrate Australia's continued support for Ukraine by urgently:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) seeking advice from defence industry and NATO partners as to what support may be available to facilitate the refurbishment and operation of MRH-90 Taipan helicopters by Ukraine and reconsider the response to the government of Ukraine;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) responding affirmatively to the Ukrainian request for thermal power to assist in power generation;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) re-establishing Australia's embassy in Kyiv; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) delivering a comprehensive strategy of support covering military, humanitarian and energy supplies.</para></quote>
<para>I thank the member for Berowra for bringing this important motion to the attention of the House. I think I join with all my colleagues on both sides of the House in wishing the member for Berowra a speedy recovery from COVID. I'm here moving the motion in his stead.</para>
<para>The 24th of this month, Saturday, marked two years since Russia, under President Putin, invaded Ukraine in his illegal, immoral war, which the Ukrainians did not ask for, a conflict which has brutally resulted in the cause of some 27,449 casualties—civilian casualties. That is 27½ thousand civilian casualties, including more than 10,000 civilian deaths. Just earlier today, the Ukraine defence force announced that some 30,000 Ukrainian soldiers had been killed in the last two years.</para>
<para>This is a war that President Putin of Russia thought would be over within a day or two. This is a war where he thought Ukrainians would crumble under the might of the Russian military. But, led by President Zelenskyy—this is a president who I think will go down in history as one of the great leaders of modern-day times. This is a man who could have turned tail and run. But he didn't. He didn't want a lift; he wanted support from allies to help Ukraine defeat Russia. He wanted support from allies to defend his homeland. It's an example of great leadership. We have seen the corollary of that in other countries like Afghanistan, where the president of Afghanistan left and the country fell. Kabul fell. President Zelenskyy decided that that was not what he wanted for his people, and he stayed. He stayed the course. It's up to us to support Ukraine. It's up to us to support the government and the people of Ukraine.</para>
<para>The coalition calls on the Albanese Labor government to reverse their decision and donate Australia's out-of-service MRH-90 Taipan helicopters to Ukraine, as they requested in December 2023. We call on a reinstatement of an Australian embassy in Kyiv and join the more than 67 other diplomatic missions which have already returned. Sixty-seven diplomatic missions have returned. We call on the Australian government to respond to the repeated requests Ukraine has made for Australian coal to support their energy needs, just as the coalition government provided coal when we were in government. The coalition also calls for the swift finalisation of a double-tax agreement between Australia and Ukraine to support the rebuilding of this war-ravaged country. We also call upon the government to urgently deliver a comprehensive strategy which outlines Australia's ongoing commitment to Ukraine and ensures long-term multiyear sustainable Australian support for Ukraine. When we were in government we provided significant support; in fact, we were the largest non-NATO contributor to support for Ukraine. Since the Labor government came to power that has dropped down the rankings. We proudly supported Ukraine with military equipment to defend itself. The Labor government has provided equipment which dates back to the Vietnam War. And we are calling on the government to provide these MRH-90 Taipan helicopters, which would immensely help them to be able to evacuate casualties from the battlefield.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>201906</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Pearce</name>
    <name.id>282306</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ROB MITCHELL</name>
    <name.id>M3E</name.id>
    <electorate>McEwen</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Let me start by acknowledging we have just seen the second anniversary of Russia's brutal invasion into Ukraine. I want to acknowledge the courage and fortitude of the Ukrainian people, led by President Zelenskyy, who we had the pleasure of hearing speak at the UN. These are the hardest days for the people of Ukraine, and we stand with you. Our support should be above politics but clearly it is not. It is so disappointing that, when we look at this motion, we see the coalition's persistent approach to politicising international crises for their own interests here at home; in fact, it is shameful.</para>
<para>The coalition come into this place and criticise the government for our actions in Ukraine when their own party is harbouring pro-Russian supporters. The coalition is nothing but a party of hypocrisy. How dare they accuse the government of weak and too-little-too-late responses to a conflict when they cannot even keep their own back bench in line. The opposition is so strong on Ukraine that you have to ask: Why do you have Senator Antic parading around the Senate floor saying, 'The little fellow from Ukraine, whatever his name is'? That is the seriousness to which the coalition treats this illegal war. Followed by, 'you know, who cares?' in reference to the President of Ukraine. We do. We care. The Australian people care and the global community should care. But, shamefully, once again, you have the Leader of the Opposition hiding, cowering away and not even having the guts to come out and rebuke Antic for his disgusting mockery of the Ukrainian leader. The opposition claim they are experts on defence and security when we know that, when the rubber hits the road, all they are in it for is just for the faux grandstanding for their own political purposes.</para>
<para>We heard the member opposite talk about sending the MRH-90 Taipans to Ukraine. There has been a well-documented complexity to the platform and liability issues. If fact, members opposite were the ones screaming about why were we still using them when there was a fatal crash last year? But now they say they want to give them to someone else, because they do not care. It is all about politics. All they are interested in is playing politics. The MRH-90 Taipan has been managed as a project of concern since 2011 and was unable to meet Defence's capability, availability and affordability requirements. The way the member for Berowra phrased it, it sounded as though we had backtracked due to whims and ponderings rather than actual evidence. It's just not true.</para>
<para>After the tragic crash of the Taipan helicopters last year, the government decided to ground the fleet in September for the safety of Australian soldiers. The opposition was saying these were the worst things in the sky and they are so dangerous they should be out but then they want to go and put Ukrainian lives at risk, and they have done nothing themselves. We heard their rubbish before but what we see now is a consistent case of the opposition being all mouth when in opposition but, in government, cowering like mice in the corner.</para>
<para>The request from Ukraine came in December, three months after the disposal strategy began. Also, the Taipans only had a few months left before being replaced by Black Hawks. The advice of Defence was that none were in flying condition and to get them up to spec would have been a huge investment of taxpayer dollars. The Deputy Prime Minister said</para>
<quote><para class="block">… we need to be making sure, that what we are providing to Ukraine is useful and is practical.</para></quote>
<para>Unlike those opposite, we actually look at the evidence and advice to make informed decisions.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ROB MITCHELL</name>
    <name.id>M3E</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>We continue to hear the carping over there from a bloke who is, ironically, on the intelligence committee but couldn't even stand around and listen to what the Americans were saying on the Ukraine war when we were over there in the States.</para>
<para>On 15 February 2024, we announced we would provide a $50 million grant to the International Fund for Ukraine, directly supporting the procurement of priority military capabilities. Australia's overall support for Ukraine is approximately $960 million, including $780 million in assistance for Ukraine's armed forces. This is in addition to the military support that has already been provided, including 120 Bushmasters, 56 M113 armoured vehicles, six 155-millimetre M777 howitzers, anti-armour weapons and ammunition, body armour, winter clothing, defence industry packages, and financial contributions to NATO and the UK to purchase and deliver military assistance to Ukraine on Australia's behalf. Australian personnel continue to train Ukrainian soldiers as part of an extended and expanded mission into the UK. Our Wedgetail aircraft is also lending its capabilities in Germany to help protect the vital international gateway of military and humanitarian assistance to Ukraine. In addition to the defence support, Australia has provided $70 million in emergency humanitarian assistance to meet the needs of the Ukrainian people. We call on Russia to end this illegal invasion of Ukrainian territory, and we will support Ukraine until the conflict ends on their terms.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PEARCE</name>
    <name.id>282306</name.id>
    <electorate>Braddon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Saturday marked the second anniversary of Russia's immoral and illegal invasion of Ukraine. As a nation, we stand shoulder to shoulder with all Ukrainians. We share their grief. We honour their bravery. We recognise the strength of the people who for more than 730 days, against all odds, have courageously defended their sovereignty, their freedom and their home. We grieve for the lives lost and the casualties from Russia's abhorrent actions. Brutality has resulted in more than 10,000 civilian deaths and more than 27,000 civilian injuries.</para>
<para>Now is not the time for our resolve to waver or diminish in any form. Now is the time for Australia to remain steadfast and to reconfirm its commitment to fight for the rule of law and national sovereignty that every Australian depends on. These are global principles that Ukrainians are fighting for on behalf of every single Australian in their own country—principles that underpin peace and prosperity in our region and right across the world. But it is beholden on the government of the day, the Albanese government, to act. Within two months of Russia's invasion, the former coalition government delivered a comprehensive $285 million package of support to Ukraine. This included military and humanitarian assistance, visas for Ukrainians seeking shelter in Australia, and 79,000 tonnes of thermal coal. We also applied more than 800 sanctions to Russian individuals and entities and their supporters. The Liberal and National parties continue to offer our bipartisan support to the government, but the Albanese government have been left wanting in their support for Ukraine and for global peace.</para>
<para>A prime example of this is the government's failure to support the Ukraine in the form of a donation, which was requested by Ukraine, of Australian out-of-service MRH-90 Taipan helicopters. A formal request to acquire the Taipan helicopter platform was made by the Ukrainian government in December last year. This Albanese government refused this request on the basis that it is not feasible to return the MRH-90 Taipan to flying condition. This government preferred, and is to proceed with, the option of disassembling, decommissioning and burying the said helicopter platform. This is despite the value of each platform on the second-hand international market reportedly being around $20 million.</para>
<para>The decision just doesn't pass the pub test. How can disassembling and burying a Taipan helicopter be a better option than giving Ukraine a much-needed aviation capability? The cost of decommissioning the rotary-wing platform and removing rare earth and dangerous materials before burial will cost millions of dollars. Ukraine's request made it clear that they would work with NATO allies, including Germany and France, in order to operate these aircraft platforms in casualty-evacuation roles, which have been proven since the Vietnam War to be a key factor in saving casualties and lives in war. It is the height of arrogance for this government to say that we don't think that Ukraine and NATO partners are up to handling these helicopters. I call on the government to reverse this decision, to pause the dismantling of the MRH-90 fleet and to genuinely consult on this with the Ukrainian administration.</para>
<para>Labor's 2023-24 budget delivered no new funding commitments to support Ukraine's defence or humanitarian needs. There are no plans to reopen Australia's embassy in Kyiv, despite more than 60 other nations doing so, including allies from the UK, US, Canada, the EU and Germany. The Ukrainian government has repeatedly called for increased Australian military support, and this Albanese government has not stepped up. It has damaged Australia's international reputation as a trusted defence partner and ally.</para>
<para>The coalition reaffirms its unwavering commitment to Ukraine. We stand up today and say that. These are Ukraine's darkest days, and I call on this government to deliver what is needed—a comprehensive strategy to support the military, humanitarian and energy supply needs of one of the bravest countries in the world.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KHALIL</name>
    <name.id>101351</name.id>
    <electorate>Wills</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I acknowledge the member for Berowra for moving this motion on Ukraine. 24 February marks two years since Putin's illegal military operation began. Even though it has been two years of bloody war, all of us here continue to condemn Russia's unilateral, illegal and immoral invasion of Ukraine and continue to call on Russia to immediately withdraw its forces from Ukrainian territories. For Ukrainians whose lives have been shattered by this conflict, two years must feel like an eternal lifetime of pain. I think we should all take a moment to acknowledge and commend the unwavering courage of the people of Ukraine in the face of the horrors inflicted upon them. The physical and mental strain faced by the people of Ukraine are acute, yet they remain brave, courageous, resilient and focused on victory.</para>
<para>I want to be clear that, despite the protestations from those opposite, Ukraine has the full support of the Albanese government. We are committed to standing with Ukraine for as long as it takes Ukraine to end the conflict on its own terms. The facts are there. Our contribution to Ukraine's war effort currently sits at around $960 million, including $780 million in assistance for the Armed Forces of Ukraine. On this second anniversary of Russia's brutal full-scale invasion, the Albanese government has announced that it will provide an additional $50 million grant to the International Fund for Ukraine, directly supporting the procurement of priority military capabilities. That contribution will be used to procure priority military equipment for Ukraine. This is in addition to the military support that has already been provided—I remind those opposite—including: 120 Bushmasters; 56 M113 armoured vehicles; 650 M777 howitzers; 105- and 155-millimetre ammunition; anti-armour weapons and ammunition; body armour and winter clothing; Australian defence industry packages; and financial contributions to NATO and the UK to purchase and deliver military assistance to Ukraine on Australia's behalf.</para>
<para>The ADF continues to remain actively engaged in multinational efforts under Operation Kudu, and our defence personnel continue to provide essential training to Ukrainian soldiers, bolstering their capabilities and resilience in the face of aggression. We've got our E-7A Wedgetail aircraft deployed in Germany to enhance security and facilitate vital military and humanitarian assistance to Ukraine. On that humanitarian assistance, we have provided $75 million in emergency humanitarian assistance to meet the urgent needs of the Ukrainian people, in addition to 80,000 tonnes of coal, and the government is actively considering the request for further energy assistance that's been made.</para>
<para>I need to address some of the misinformation that has been peddled about the fleet of MRH-90 Taipans. The decision to retire the MRH-90s was decided last year following a tragic crash which claimed the lives of four Australian defence personnel. This tragedy necessitated the grounding of the fleet pending ongoing crash investigations. Subsequently, the government initiated a disposal strategy in September—months before a request from Ukraine. This disposal strategy recognised that, even if the aircraft were cleared for flight, their impending replacement by new Black Hawk helicopters rendered them surplus to requirements.</para>
<para>So, contrary to misconceptions, efforts had been made to find buyers for the helicopters, and they were extensive. The decision was made to dismantle the helicopters and sell their spare parts—a fiscally responsible approach, given the lack of alternatives. The request from Ukraine came in three months after the disposal strategy began, three months after these aircraft were grounded and three months after maintenance ceased on these aircraft. They are just facts. They might be inconvenient for you.</para>
<para>It's crucial to emphasise that none of the helicopters are in flying condition, nor have they been cleared for flight pending the crash investigations. It would be irresponsible and unsafe to refurbish and deploy these MRH-90s, and it would also be a substantial expense to both the Australian taxpayer and the Ukrainian military. The opposition know this, so I find it really quite incomprehensible that they are using the horrors in Ukraine, and the pain and suffering of the people there, to try and score some cheap political points with this motion. If they really want to support Ukraine, why don't they give a dressing down to their own senator, who threw insults at the Ukrainian leader on the floor of the Senate? I'm talking about Senator Antic. They know, in this Chamber—and I'll remind them—that the Leader of the Opposition failed to rebuke Senator Antic for his contemptible mockery of the President of Ukraine in the Australian Senate.</para>
<para>Make no mistake: Australia remains steadfast in our commitment to supporting Ukraine and the Ukrainian people, who are defending their people, their territory and their sovereignty. We are with them on that. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
    <electorate>Riverina</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Yesterday Wagga Wagga hosted a moving ceremony to mark 31 years since we as a city were declared the first Rotary Peace City in the world. That was brought about by the great work of the late Tony Quinlivan, a Rotarian who did so much to foster good relations and world peace. In my keynote speech yesterday, I told those present: 'We live in a troubled world. The Russian invasion of Ukraine entered its third year yesterday. Australia stands in solidarity with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. We will continue to do what we can to help repel this illegal and immoral attack by the bully Vladimir Putin. We need peace in our world, peace in our community and peace in our hearts. What a wonderful vision and objective that is.'</para>
<para>Putin has form. I well remember when then prime minister Tony Abbott questioned Russia's involvement in the downing of MH17, with the famous 'shirtfront' phrase. Next thing you know, Putin's got his warships bearing down on Australia. This bloke is a dictator—a dictator the likes of whom we probably haven't seen since Hitler rolled his tanks into Poland in September 1939. We all know how that ended: with millions of people dead—and for what? Germany rightly quashed, and the ideology that Hitler spread rightly ended.</para>
<para>As I say, this conflict in Ukraine is now in its third year. We've heard a lot in this debate. I'm glad that the member for Berowra has brought it forward. I'm sorry that he's not here—he's unwell—and he can't speak on it. He did write an excellent piece in the <inline font-style="italic">Weekend</inline><inline font-style="italic">Australian</inline>, where he mentioned the Taipan. As he pointed out in that op-ed, 'Australia has used the Taipan helicopter since 2007.' I get the argy-bargy, backwards and forwards, about the fact that it has not been provided. I understand the government's position on this, in one sense, but it's better than having nothing at all. I get that manufacturers don't like their equipment, particularly flying machines, being passed on once their use-by date has been reached or their purpose has been fulfilled. Yet I don't think at the moment the Ukrainians care what they've got or in what state it is; they just want something to be able to repel the Russian forces. I tell you what: if your hospitals are being bombed, your children are being killed and your country is at the mercy of an oppressor and a bully, you'll take whatever you can get.</para>
<para>To that end, I do question where the 30 Bushmasters promised by Labor are. But it's not only me questioning. I met with the Australian Federation of Ukrainian Organisations co-chairs this morning, Kateryna Argyrou and Stefan Romaniw OAM, who are wondering where the promised additional 30 Bushmasters are. They are wondering where those wonderful personnel carriers, constructed and manufactured right here in Bendigo, are. The Ukrainians aren't really concerned about whether gear is 100 per cent tickety-boo. They just want equipment. They need equipment. They are desperate, because they are having the bejesus bombed out of them.</para>
<para>I tell you what, when you're up against an enemy such as Russia, when you've had at least 27,449 civilian casualties, you need anything you can get your hands on to protect your people. Just think of that. That's a lot of people; that's bigger than most of the towns in country Australia. You have all those 10,000 deaths. It's a lot of people and a lot of heartache.</para>
<para>The former coalition government delivered a comprehensive $285 million package of support, and that included coal. I'm not quite sure why there has been a delay on the request for coal. Maybe it was to not offend the Greens and their preferences. But we need to be better at supporting Ukraine at this time because they need every bit of help they can get. They've received it in the past, and I implore the government to do more in this important situation.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RAE</name>
    <name.id>300122</name.id>
    <electorate>Hawke</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It is our duty, as a free and democratic society, to call out illegal and immoral actions such as Russia's invasion of Ukraine, which commenced two years ago this month. It is also our responsibility to support the Ukrainian people throughout their fight for freedom and sovereignty. That's why Australia is providing ongoing financial and direct military support, including a $50 million contribution to the International Fund for Ukraine just two weeks ago. This grant takes our overall contribution to the Ukrainian fight to just shy of a billion dollars.</para>
<para>However, Australia's contribution to this fight is not simply about dollar figures or token contributions. It is about providing effective support to the Ukrainian armed forces and, importantly, to Ukrainian people. We cannot simply throw old, discarded equipment at this conflict. Instead, we must provide appropriate and effective military equipment that can act as force multipliers for the Ukrainian armed forces on the ground. The MRH-90 Taipans, to which the member for Berowra has referred, have been managed as a project of concern since 2011. They have been subject to extensive disassembly, and no aircraft are currently in flying condition. The last thing we want is for our support to cause further harm or be a force degrader, sapping up important time and resources to be maintained.</para>
<para>That is why our government made the decision to not provide Taipan helicopters to Ukraine. Ensuring that our support is both practical and useful is essential and that will continue to be at the heart of all decisions we make about support for our Ukrainian brothers and sisters. That's why we have donated Australian assets, such as Bushmasters and M113s, which are making a practical difference and are saving lives on the ground in Ukraine. Australia's E-7A Wedgetail aircraft is providing support in Germany to protect the international gateway of military and humanitarian support into Ukraine. It is also why our government is proud to contribute to the multinational effort to train Ukrainian infantry through Operation Kudu. Australian defence personnel are in the United Kingdom on an extended and expanded mission to share knowledge and provide training to Ukrainian soldiers to ensure that they are best equipped in the fight against the Russian invasion. Our support to Ukraine, however, is not limited to military assistance. We have also provided $75 million in value for humanitarian assistance to support the Ukrainian people through this extraordinarily challenging and dangerous time. This funding provides support for basic necessities like food, water and shelter.</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government is committed to providing material and financial support that will better equip the Ukrainian armed forces in their fight. Sadly, those opposite are more interested in politicising a serious international issue than in supporting our efforts. In fact, the difference in approach between the Albanese Labor government and the Liberals opposite towards defence more generally could not be starker. While they viewed national security and defence policy as an opportunity for a media release, we understand the importance of developing and implementing a sound defence strategy for the long term. That's why this government commissioned the Defence Strategic Review and is responding to its findings to better equip our military to protect Australia and its partners. Just last week, the Deputy Prime Minister announced a plan for a larger and more lethal surface combatant fleet for the Royal Australian Navy. This is just one example of how the Albanese Labor government is investing strategically in the long-term future of the Australian Defence Force.</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government is committed to standing with Ukraine in their fight against Russia's illegal invasion. We remain absolutely steadfast in our support for the defence of their people, their territory and their sovereignty for as long as it takes for Ukraine to end the conflict on their own terms.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LAWRENCE</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
    <electorate>Hasluck</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I oppose the motion in its specifics, as I'll explain, but I do join with the member for Berowra in acknowledging the strength, determination and courage of the Ukrainian people. War is always terrible, and comes with terrible cost. Tens of thousands have died on both sides of this war and, alongside the deaths, there will be at least as many injured—many scarred for life—children left without parents, infrastructure damaged beyond repair and a whole generation set back in their lives by the disruptions that this war invariably created and will create. It will leave a lasting legacy.</para>
<para>The conflict between Russia and Ukraine did not begin two years ago, as we know. The immediate roots of the current conflict lie in the political changes in Ukraine in 2014, and Russia's attitude and action at that time. This time marks two years since the invasion of Ukraine, an independent and democratic nation, by Russia. The Crimea conflict then, and this invasion now, are part of a wholly evidenced attitude on the part of Russia that it does not consider Ukraine as an independent state. Russia viewed Ukraine as a vassal state, not one that could freely choose its own foreign or trade policies but one which had to choose within the bounds that suited Russia. Australia's attitude stands in contrast: Ukraine is a democracy and we are obliged to support its democracy, as we do democracy everywhere. The democratic spirit binds us in friendship with many nations. Elections are in fact due in Ukraine this month, and it's of course unlikely that they'll be able to take place now until the war and the state of emergency caused by this invasion are over.</para>
<para>The Albanese government was elected on 21 May 2022. It's a measure of our solidarity with Ukraine that on 3 July 2022, before this parliament had even commenced, the Prime Minister visited Ukraine and met with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, calling the invasion a gross violation of international law. The Albanese government is funding and has contributed to the military defence of Ukraine, and we do so without diminution. The government considers each request made to it and responds after considering the best advice, and it's inappropriate to politicise that support. In December 2021, the Morrison government announced that the MRH-90 helicopter would be withdrawn from Australian service by 2024 due to ongoing issues. After the Jervis Bay ditching and the fatal crash in the Whitsundays a year ago, this government immediately grounded the fleet and has moved to replace it with Blackhawks. In other words, two governments have been on the same page in relation to those machines until the opposition saw some benefit for its current political purposes.</para>
<para>The Albanese government is following the advice of experts within the Department of Defence in relation to the helicopter question and will continue to do so. The opposition can pretend it knows better than the experts if it likes. But, further, it is regrettable that the opposition has sought to campaign for the re-establishment of an embassy as a way of demonstrating support in a war. The decision of when Australia opens its embassy in Kyiv will be determined upon the advice of the department, taking account of the safety of ambassadorial staff. Neither I nor the member for Berowra nor any other members of this place should be pushing for this during a war. The suggestion is reckless and shows no consideration or respect for our consular staff. They are not surplus military hardware.</para>
<para>Viewed objectively, Australia's commitment to Ukraine is bipartisan and has been consistently so over the last two years. So this motion is an unfortunate deviation from that bipartisanship. Our overall support amounts to almost $1 billion, $760 million of which is military assistance. The most recent commitment was on 15 February, a $50 million grant to the International Fund for Ukraine, directing and supporting the procurement of military capabilities. Apart from direct financial assistance, our support has included 120 Bushmasters, 56 armoured vehicles and six howitzers, as well as ammunition and armour. Australian personnel continue to train Ukrainian soldiers as part of an extended and expanded mission in the United Kingdom.</para>
<para>War is a dog that is always hungry. I abhor the decision by the Russian government to invade Ukraine, and I hope, as all members do, for a speedy resolution to this terrible conflict. Until that time, Ukraine can count on Australia's continued friendship and support. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Workplace Relations</title>
          <page.no>162</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SITOU</name>
    <name.id>298121</name.id>
    <electorate>Reid</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The closing loopholes legislation is deeply personal to me. My parents, like many migrants, came to this country seeking a better life. They found it through secure jobs with good conditions supported by a union, a foundation that allowed our family to thrive here. But, unfortunately, well-paying jobs with good conditions have become increasingly elusive because of those opposite. They had low wages as a deliberate design feature of their economic plan. This bill aims to fix that, ensuring that our industrial relations landscape upholds the basic tenet that a fair day's work gets a fair day's pay. The Fair Work Act has been a cornerstone of our industrial relations system, balancing the needs of businesses and workers alike. But, as our economy evolves, so too must our laws.</para>
<para>The emergence of the gig economy and precarious employment conditions demands the attention and action of this place, because we do not want to become a nation where you need tips to survive. That's what the closing loopholes bill is all about. This legislation addressed those modern challenges, ensuring our legislation reflects current realities faced by thousands of gig workers across the country. It addressed the sorts of realities faced by food delivery riders in my electorate—workers like Zhuoying Wang, who sustained an injury at work and was offered free food instead of workers compensation. It will allow the Fair Work Commission to make orders for minimum standards for new forms of work, such as gig work. This is about ensuring some basic minimum standards so that drivers and riders like Zhuoying Wang don't have to choose between their pay and their basic safety.</para>
<para>At the core of this piece of legislation was the desire to build on the government's efforts to get wages moving. With current cost-of-living challenges, we know that taming inflation and getting more money into people's pockets is the best way to raise living standards. On every one of those fronts, we're getting on with it. Headline inflation is now at its lowest level in two years. Monthly inflation has a three in front of it for the first time since December 2021. These figures show we are making welcome and encouraging progress to the inflation challenge. Our policies are helping. The 0.9 per cent rise in the wage price index in the December quarter means wages were 4.2 per cent higher through the year—the equal-fastest annual growth since 2009.</para>
<para>Since the election, nominal wages have been growing at an annualised average of 4.0 per cent, compared to 2.2 per cent for our predecessors. Real wages growth is back, but we know there is more work to do because things are still tough. That's why our cost-of-living tax cuts are so important, because no matter what you earn you'll get to keep more of it. We want every Australian worker to take home more of what they earn. But, unlike those opposite, we want them to be safe while doing it. That's why it's so disheartening that the opposition couldn't get behind this legislation, and this really shows what the Liberals are all about. It shows that they have learnt nothing from their decade of presiding over low wages; that they're fine with maintaining the dangerous status quo for gig workers and truckies; that they're okay with maintaining loopholes that undercut enterprise agreements between businesses and their workforce; and that they're okay with not giving long-term casuals a better pathway to permanency and the job security that comes with it.</para>
<para>Those opposite want workers to earn less and work more, whereas we on this side of the House want workers to earn more and keep more of what they earn.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WARE</name>
    <name.id>300123</name.id>
    <electorate>Hughes</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the closing loopholes bill, which concerns a radical reordering of Australian workplace law. There are four areas particularly around this legislation that I'll address: the massive increase we see in this legislation around union interference in the workplace; the disbenefits of penalising casuals in the way that this law does; the way that this is going to impact on the gig economy and gig economy workers; and, particularly, the ways in which Labor has the right-to-disconnect laws completely wrong. These are four elements that all form part of the so-called closing loopholes bill.</para>
<para>This is a move back to a very centralised industrial relations system, the like of which we haven't seen since the 1970s and 1980s. To say this is closing loopholes is disingenuous. In this place we all want Australians to have safe, high wages. We want them to have sustainable jobs and to be rewarded for their hard work and experience. Primarily, with the closing loopholes legislation the government has failed to identify how this legislation will increase productivity within our country—how, in the long term, it will create more and more jobs for Australians. If those opposite cannot understand the importance of increasing productivity within our workplace relations system then perhaps they will accept the words of their former prime minister Bob Hawke: 'The only way in which we can lift real wages in the longer term is by lifting productivity. If we don't lift productivity, we can't afford increased real wages.' Again, from Bob Hawke, 'Productivity is the key to improving living standards.' Bob Hawke again, 'We have to look at productivity as the means by which we can secure better living standards for Australians into the future.' This closing loopholes legislation, though, is silent about productivity and how any part of Labor's policy is going to lead to further long-term jobs. It is an attack on the gig economy; on casual employment; on owners and drivers—those who want to be their own boss; and it gives unions unprecedented rights-of-entry into businesses.</para>
<para>Government members interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WARE</name>
    <name.id>300123</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I can hear those opposite arguing, but when we look first of all at the union agenda—this was a welcome present for the unions—the unions were salivating over it. These measures are designed to grow not just union membership but union power and control of our economy, the same way that the union movement already controls this government.</para>
<para>Why bring in legislation that attacks gig workers, casual employees, and tradies—those who want to be their own boss? Why bring in legislation that attacks independent contractors? Because these are people who do not normally want to join unions, this is an attempt to bring them into the great union family. Instead, these IR changes should be focused on enterprise bargaining. They should be focused on a modern workplace system, not on punishing those who want to remain as casuals.</para>
<para>If we look first of all at what this Labor government are attempting to do to casuals, they have said, 'Oh, this is a casualisation of the workplace; this is very unfair to casuals.' No, there are many casuals who choose to work as casuals and should be able to have that right. They don't need to be told by the Labor Party or by unions that they can no longer be casuals. The definition of casual now extends to three pages—to work out what a casual employee is! The legislation now also gives unprecedented rights for people to go straight to Fair Work, straight to courts and to have an external party again interfering in the relationship between employers and employees, which, in 2024, should be a much more flexible system.</para>
<para>Then if we look at the right to disconnect: on the face of it, yes, of course employees need a reasonable time away from the workforce. However, modern technology has provided flexibility to the workplace. That flexibility needs to be two ways, so, again, we do not need the Labor government telling employees and telling employers when and where they can and cannot work.</para>
<para>Closing loopholes is bad law. It is about unnecessary interference in what was a flexible workplace relationship system. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURNELL</name>
    <name.id>300129</name.id>
    <electorate>Spence</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Here we go again, same old Labor, coming into this place, moving another motion supporting Australian workers. How dare a government move motions in support of workers simply because they have championed legislation in this place that means higher wages and more stable and secure employment for Australian workers, leading to an economy where Australian workers are earning more and keeping more of what they earn. How dare a government have the sheer audacity to look at two situations, one with a worker taking from that till and getting prosecuted and another where an employer frequently steals from their employees and suffers the indignity of paying those wages back months or years later. This is a government that proudly wears as a badge of honour passing a law to criminalise industrial manslaughter and another one to solidify viability and road safety in our road transport industry.</para>
<para>I bet that even the mere thought of some of these measures is enough to make some of the members of this chamber sick to the very core. I can certainly guarantee that no member sitting on this side of the chamber suffers from such an affliction. I am not here to make those opposite feel better or to assuage their guilty conscience, nor do I make any apologies for bringing that about and nor does the Albanese Labor government. To all of those things and so much more contained within closing loopholes, those opposite had so many opportunities to show workers that they may not always be on their side but that they might put a bet each way on the fights that count. No.</para>
<para>In this 47th Parliament, those opposite had 48 opportunities to do this, and how did I arrive at that number when the motion clearly states 36? That's a great question. Around two weeks ago, when my colleague the member for Hawke submitted this motion for consideration, it was true. The Liberal National Party had seen the chance to do the right thing by Australian working families, and 36 times they said no. One worker, they may feel genuine compassion for. But when they pluralise them, a collection of workers, or a union, that really makes them feel very queasy indeed. They so often substitute their great boogieman, the union boss, they all have visualised in their very imaginations, and, like the bull staring into the red, they don't look at those standing behind them—Australian workers. Just like the bull, many a time they come to regret charging blindly at the red cape at the expense of forgetting what is behind it. Australian workers will remember. They will remember that, since the member for Hawke stood here two weeks ago to the day, those opposite had 12 opportunities to stand up for Australian workers. But since that motion was before the chamber last week, 13 historic moments have taken place. This parliament passed the second, and what appeared to have been the final, act of closing loopholes. And 12 more times the Liberal and National parties turned their backs on everyday Australians—13 reasons why indeed.</para>
<para>Life went on for those opposite, even after they were dragged kicking and screaming to their eventual support of the Albanese government's tax plan. They don't need to worry about listening to everyday Australians. You don't need to listen to the thousands of gig workers they wanted to deprive of minimum standards that will keep them safe on the job and keep them able to carve out a decent living, filling a role that the 21st century has unearthed. But those opposite can always choose to have pizza dropped off at their door and choose not hear and see the story behind how it got there. And they chose to 48 times in a matter of months. That's 48 more reasons for Australians to know that wages are moving again in this country. It's not due to any measures by those opposite in government or through their support in opposition. They are moving in spite of them, even to this very day.</para>
<para>I have a tip for those opposite. We shouldn't become a nation where workers rely on tips to survive. Australian workers need a government in their corner and have needed one for years. Last year AiG said that the Fair Work Commission should exercise restraint and caution when setting the minimum wage. This is, of course, different from 2018, before the pandemic, when AiG said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… An excessive increase would reduce the job security of low paid workers and would reduce employment opportunities for the unemployed and underemployed.</para></quote>
<para>The champions of flexibility are pretty inflexible when it comes to raising your wages. It's a shame the opposition sing hymn and verse from their sheet.</para>
<para>There you have it. Yesterday was not a good time to lift wages. Today isn't either, and tomorrow never will be. Working families across Australia had 48 more times to see whose side those opposite are on, and it certainly isn't theirs.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BROADBENT</name>
    <name.id>MT4</name.id>
    <electorate>Monash</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>That's an interesting address from the member before me. I was here for the Hawke-Keating government. I was here for a number of incoming governments, including the Howard government, the Rudd-Gillard governments and now this government.</para>
<para>Going right back to the Hawke-Keating regime—they opened up the labour market. They did a deal with the unions for the betterment of this nation, and they put flexibility into the labour market. John Howard and his team were great supporters of small businesses and families, and they endeavoured to open up the labour market as Keating and Hawke had done, following in their footsteps. And along came the Rudd-Gillard governments. The Gillard government, particularly, brought the curtain down on industrial relations and started to stifle the labour market completely. Now this government has gone right over the top on those changes and made doing business more inflexible for people who want to engage.</para>
<para>At five o'clock this morning, when I was having a walk, there was a guy out there obviously doing the Bidfood deliveries—whatever the company is. I've seen a few of their trucks around, delivering to restaurants very early in the morning. And I thought: 'That guy's got two jobs. He's doing one delivery in the morning, and by nine o'clock he's sitting at his next job. I reckon that guy's got two jobs, and I reckon the guys before him have two jobs.'</para>
<para>I read the other day that some people are now so stretched that they're going for three jobs. That's not unusual. I had three jobs when I was young too. It was sort of a normal thing for us to do. The flexibility was driven by our employers who, if you were a good employee and they wanted to keep you on, either paid us more, gave us some time or just encouraged us, as young people, to take that opportunity.</para>
<para>For a lot of these people in the gig economy that you talk about now, quite often it's their second job, because they want to get ahead. All this loopholes legislation does is put a real crush on that debate. It puts a real crush on their opportunities. It puts a real blanket over, especially, small- and medium-sized businesses, who will have to deal with issues they haven't dealt with before. I know people in this Labor government who know what they're trying to do with flexible working arrangements. Parents, university students and all the other people that do these jobs want the flexibility to deal with their employer as they would see fit—to suit them, not to suit a stringent set of rules laid down by a Labor government with a lot of people who've never run a business and who've never run a pizza shop. These are hard businesses to run—and the smaller the business, the harder it is and the harder the owners have got to work. It's a fact now that, if you're a casual, you get paid all your entitlements in the hourly rate. You get paid your long service leave, your holiday pay and your super within the confines of your hourly rate. If it's $20 an hour for a full-time worker, it's $30 an hour or more—$35 an hour—for the employee that wants that flexibility of working part-time. You don't have to say, 'Joe Blow, we insist that you conform to our rules.'</para>
<para>The worst part of this is that it's such detailed legislation—it's perplexing, it's complex, it's unwieldy and it's really hard for people in business, and startups especially, to get their heads around this. I think Australia will pay a terrible price for the legislation that the government has put before the nation now and that it's passing—a terrible price.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms FERNANDO</name>
    <name.id>299964</name.id>
    <electorate>Holt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The passage of the closing loopholes legislation marked a crucial moment in the livelihoods and wellbeing of Australian workers. This landmark legislation championed by the Albanese Labor government marked a significant step forward in protecting the rights and dignities of workers across our nation. We proudly stand here today having achieved a milestone in our ongoing commitment to ensuring fairer wages, safe working conditions and job security for all Australians. As a former union delegate and organiser, I have witnessed firsthand the struggles faced by workers in precarious employment situations. The reforms contained in this landmark legislation represent a bright future for every Australian worker.</para>
<para>First and foremost, let us acknowledge the significance of closing the labour hire loophole. This loophole has allowed dodgy employers to exploit workers by sidestepping established agreements and undercutting wages. By empowering the Fair Work Commission to enforce minimum standards for labour hire employees, the closing loopholes legislation sent a clear message that such practices will not be tolerated in Australia. Furthermore, the criminalisation of wage theft is a critical measure in holding accountable those who seek to unlawfully withhold wages from their employees. We have closed a gap where an employer stealing money from their employee's pay cheque is treated no less than if that employee stole from the till. No longer will employers be able to enrich themselves at the expense of hardworking Australians without facing severe consequences. The legislation will ensure that justice is served for those who have been victims of a wage theft, and will be a powerful deterrent to those considering such unethical action.</para>
<para>Additionally, the introduction of industrial manslaughter as a criminal offence underscores our commitment to prioritising the safety and wellbeing of workers. By imposing significant penalties for breaches of safety standards, we have taken proactive steps to prevent tragic and avoidable accidents in the workplace. Furthermore, the Albanese government has provided greater protection and stability for casual workers and gig economy workers. We have given casual workers the opportunity to transition to permanent positions, granting them access to vital benefits and security. Similarly, we have established minimum standards for gig workers, ensuring that they are not subject to dodgy practices that compromise their financial security and wellbeing.</para>
<para>By setting fair minimum standards for the road transport industry, we are prioritising safety and sustainability in one of our nation's most vital sectors. This measure not only protects the rights of truck drivers but also safeguards the broader community from the dangers posed by unsafe practices and inadequate standards. The passage of this government's landmark closing loopholes legislation represented a landmark achievement in our ongoing efforts to ensure safe and secure employment for all Australians. It's disheartening to note that instead the coalition has continued to choose prioritising their own interest over the wellbeing of Australian workers. Despite widespread support for measures aimed at closing loopholes and enhancing worker protections, the coalition has voted 48 times against legislation to get wages moving in this term of parliament. Their refusal to support a minimum standard for gig workers, reforms to the road transport industry and improved conditions for casual workers highlights a disturbing pattern of disregard for the rights and dignity of working Australians. This serves as a stark reminder of the importance of a Labor government in representing Australian workers.</para>
<para>The closing loopholes legislation is a testament to Labor's commitment to stand up for the rights and dignity of Australian workers in the face of persistent opposition and obstruction. Let us continue to strive for a future where every worker is treated with the respect and dignity they deserve.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr STEVENS</name>
    <name.id>176304</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm not really sure about the merit of having these motions to debate legislation which we've just debated a few months ago in the same parliament, but I don't criticise the particular member who moved this. I'm sure it has probably been a practice for some time and, no doubt, under the previous government. We've had all the debates on the legislation that this motion refers to, but I'll take the opportunity to stand up here because I want to reiterate something I've said to the business community before—particularly to small businesses and family businesses. And that is that when you hear this appalling rhetoric from the government, accusing anyone who is in business—anyone who takes a risk, puts their capital on the line, works hard, wants to contribute to our economy and, hopefully, employ people—then you can think to yourself, 'There's one side of politics which thinks I'm evil and that all I'm looking to do is exploit the people who work for me'. I want those people in the business community—particularly the small business and family business community—to know that there's the other side of politics, which thinks quite differently.</para>
<para>Here in the coalition, we appreciate the people who take a risk, put their money on the line and start a business. We know that 70 per cent of businesses will fail in their first three years, and we know that people can lose a lot in taking that risk. So when they're successful, good on them—and thank you to them for what they contribute to our economy. And there's nothing wrong with big businesses, because the bigger the business the more successful they've been, the more people they employ and the more they contribute to our economy. They help to pay for the great standard of living that we have in this country. The private sector and the business community are the heart of our success, so people who want to demonise them, think they're evil and talk about them in derogatory ways, as if they're one big group, should be ashamed of themselves. They should reflect on the fact that these people are the ones doing the heavy lifting in our economy.</para>
<para>The member for Monash made a great point, which reminds us of the value of members who have served for a long time in the parliament—the experience they have and the things they can reflect on. He talked about the Hawke-Keating era—about opening up our economy and introducing flexibility into the workplace. This was particularly with the Keating government and enterprise bargaining; the concept of saying, 'There have to be ways in which employees and the employer in a particular business in a particular enterprise can come together and talk about ways in which they can have flexibility from the straitjacket of some of the awards et cetera that are mutually agreed upon and which are to beneficial to the employees and the employer in that business.' The Rudd-Gillard Fair Work Act really deconstructed all of that, and what we've seen from this government are further retrograde steps away from flexibility and mutual benefits for employees and employers.</para>
<para>All these things that the government are talking about were not things they made any virtue of in the election campaign. They never talked about all this re-empowerment of the union movement in a campaign. This agenda was all hidden from the voters. All the measures that we're seeing coming through with these salami-slicing tactics in these various IR bills to benefit the union movement were never going to be campaigned on, because this government was never going to want to shine a light on what it was going to do to repay the union movement for the enormous financial backing that the union movement gives it in its political quests.</para>
<para>But we also know that there is always a price to pay for that support, and we see it in a lot of elements of these industrial relations reforms that are about the union movement—things like not requiring an employee's approval to increase deductions from their pay packet, that little gem that was in one of the bills last year, and so many other things that benefit the union movement, who come into the chamber to look down upon these votes and see, with great pride, their handiwork in action. I am sure that these union bosses brag to each other about what they got for the donations that they gave to the Labor Party in the last campaign.</para>
<para>So we're onto this, and I think the Australian people are onto it as well. To the businesses that are going to suffer because of the treatment they receive and the aspersions cast against them for doing nothing other than growing their business, employing people and contributing to our economy, we apologise for the derogatory terms hurled at them. We support them and thank them, particularly small businesses and family businesses, for what they do as the backbone of our economy.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LAXALE</name>
    <name.id>299174</name.id>
    <electorate>Bennelong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>A few weeks ago in this place, I met with a delegation of gig economy workers. Those workers, whose livelihoods depend on gig work, opened my eyes to the harsh realities lurking behind the convenience and efficiency of our convenience economy. In recent years, the gig economy has permeated every aspect of our day-to-day lives. From ordering food to booking a ride, gig economy platforms have seamlessly integrated themselves into our routines, offering flexibility and convenience at the palm of your hand. However, amidst that convenience lies a hidden truth here in Australia: the workers powering these platforms are often subjected to precarious employment conditions, low pay and limited job security. While we enjoy the convenience, we now know that the workers who support some operators in this business model grapple with the uncertainty of irregular income, the absence of benefits and the constant pressure to accept unfavourable terms in order to secure their next gig.</para>
<para>There aren't many people living in Australia who believe that workers should be paid below the minimum wage or that they should not be protected by fair and decent working conditions, but that's what's happening today. Gig workers need protection, and locals in Bennelong have contacted me to tell me that they want these workers to have better rights and better pay. Locals support better protections for gig workers because of the awful stories of danger and exploitation that we have all seen on the news over the past few years.</para>
<para>Recently I met with Zhouying, who used to work for one of those companies. Without notice, her gig economy employer slashed her base delivery rate and imposed unrealistic deadlines, endangering her safety. In her quest for fair pay and fair conditions, Zhouying bravely organised worker protests. However, her actions were met with retaliation from the company, leaving her financially vulnerable and unable to meet her basic needs such as rent and food.</para>
<para>Similarly, Nabin, a delivery driver here in Canberra, works for multiple gig economy apps. After factoring in expenses, he barely earns $13 60 per hour—sometimes as little as $4 per delivery. At this rate, to pay the bills, Nabin is forced to work gruelling hours, sometimes exceeding 70 or 85 hours per week. He struggles to make ends meet. The constant fear of being deactivated from the app due to perceived inadequacies only adds to his stress and anxiety, forcing him to rush through traffic in a bid to meet unrealistic targets. The lack of transparency and accountability in gig economy platforms exacerbates the exploitation of workers just like Nabin, who are forced to accept unfavourable working conditions to pay the bills.</para>
<para>These are just two stories, but they reflect the harsh realities faced by gig economy workers in this country, who often find themselves trapped in a cycle of exploitation and instability. People like Nabin and Zhouying are the reason why the government's closing loopholes legislation is so important. That legislation represents a crucial step towards ensuring that workers like Nabin and Zhouying are afforded the protections and rights that they deserve. It sends a clear message to business that wage theft, unsafe working conditions and exploitation will not be tolerated and that every worker, regardless of their employment arrangement, deserves to be paid at least the minimum wage and to be treated with dignity and respect.</para>
<para>The closing loopholes legislation will better protect workers from exploitation and dangerous working conditions while also ensuring that gig economy workers are afforded the same rights and protections as traditional employees. By setting minimum standards tailored to the gig economy, the government acknowledges the importance of preserving flexibility and autonomy for workers while ensuring that they are not subjected to unfair treatment or exploitation. It ensures that gig workers across the country can continue to embrace the flexibility and autonomy that working for a digital platform provides, trusting that they will receive fair treatment and adequate compensation.</para>
<para>This legislation is not just about closing legal gaps. It's about standing up for the dignity and rights of every worker in our nation. It's about ensuring that no worker is left behind in the rapidly evolving landscape of the modern workforce. At the end of the day, this government wants workers to earn more and keep more of what they earn, whereas the Liberals want workers to work longer for less. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>There being no further speakers the debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Housing</title>
          <page.no>168</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WARE</name>
    <name.id>300123</name.id>
    <electorate>Hughes</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) National Cabinet agreed to a national target to build 1.2 million new well-located homes over five years from 1 July 2024; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the New South Wales Government has conceded that it cannot reach its agreed housing targets of 75,000 new dwellings a year over the next five years;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) expresses concern that, as a flow-on consequence, the Commonwealth Government cannot reach its target to construct 1.2 million new homes over five years;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) acknowledges that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the Government's pipedream figure for new housing did not take into account:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) record high numbers of liquidations in the building and construction industry;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) a shortage of available construction materials;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iii) increasing construction material costs; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iv) a shortage of skilled tradespeople; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the Government refused to intervene in the dispute between the Maritime Union of Australia and DP World at container terminals, leading to a 50,000 container backlog and further exacerbating construction material shortages; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) further notes that the Government has:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) legislated a failed housing plan; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) ultimately demonstrated that it cannot develop any policy to address the housing crisis, let alone deliver it.</para></quote>
<para>This motion concerns our housing affordability crisis, which is a national crisis. Whether it be homeownership or rentals, housing is largely unaffordable for most Australians that do not already own their own home—for Australians on an average wage of $85,000, for our first responders, for those who work in aged care. This is a crisis across our country. Millennials and generation Z have mostly given up on owning their own homes. I hear of teenagers being stressed, not about missing out on Taylor Swift concert tickets but about concerns that they will not be able to afford to live in the communities where they grew up, and this is a national shame.</para>
<para>In my first speech in this place I spoke of my commitment to addressing housing affordability, and whilst ever the good people of the electorate of Hughes provide me with the privilege of serving in this place I will be committed to this and I will continue to speak about this, because in my electorate this is a massive issue. After cost of living, housing affordability remains the biggest issue that people talk to me about when I'm out door-knocking, when I'm doing mobile offices and when they email me. As an example, based on figures from CoreLogic, as of July last year, to buy a house in Moorebank in my electorate you need $1.2 million; in Holsworthy, $1 million; in Oyster Bay, $1.7 million; in Jannali, $1.5 million; in Illawong, $1.6 million; and in Sutherland, $1.4 million.</para>
<para>Price is always determined by supply and demand. That is year 8 economics. The high cost of housing—the reason that we have the housing affordability problem in this country—is largely due to a lack of supply, and this is what this motion is about.</para>
<para>The Minister for Housing and the Prime Minister have said over and over again that they will deliver 1.2 million new homes over five years. So said National Cabinet. That's 240,000 new homes every year. But, a bare few months later, Labor Premier Chris Minns, in my home state of New South Wales, conceded his government cannot meet its housing targets. The New South Wales Premier, in the country's most populous state, has at least been honest. He has said New South Wales can't meet those targets. That means the federal government cannot meet its targets of 1.2 million.</para>
<para>Other supply factors that the Minister for Housing, Minister Collins, and also the Labor government overall have been silent about are things like the record number of liquidations in the building and construction industry. According to ASIC, there were nearly 2,000 construction insolvencies in the six months to September 2023—1,810. There is a massive shortage of construction materials, which has not been helped by the fight between the maritime workers union and DP World, to whose assistance the government did not come in relation to that. That saw 50,000 containers backlogged on wharves. Many of those containers contained construction materials. So we have that. We also have a massive increase in the cost of construction materials—30 per cent, the tradies in my electorate tell me. There is a massive shortage of tradespeople. We've all spoken, on both sides of this place, about the shortage of trades. There are also the delays and red tape involved in releasing land at both the state and local government levels.</para>
<para>None of these issues has been effectively addressed by the government, and that is why I say that the government has legislated a failed housing plan. That is why I say that the government cannot deliver its 1.2 million homes in five years. The government has demonstrated that it cannot develop, let alone deliver, a policy that will address housing supply and housing affordability, particularly for our millennials and our generation Z, into the future.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs McIntosh</name>
    <name.id>281513</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LAXALE</name>
    <name.id>299174</name.id>
    <electorate>Bennelong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>For a decade, the Liberals adopted a do-nothing approach on housing, staring a crisis in the eye without doing much to address it. For years, Australia has grappled with a housing affordability crisis which has been exacerbated by the lack of decisive action from the previous government. Under their watch the housing crisis got worse. The lack of action from the former government made a bad situation worse. Now it's harder to buy a home for first-home buyers, for young families and for older people as well. While the former government indulged in political rhetoric and empty promises, ordinary Australians grappled with the harsh realities of unaffordable housing, dwindling supply and lack of government support, and now families are forced to make the difficult choice between paying higher rents and being pushed to the fringes of major cities in search of more affordable housing options.</para>
<para>The failure of the previous government to address these pressing issues left countless Australians trapped in a cycle of housing insecurity and financial hardship with no relief in sight. Their negligence has left us with significant challenges that simply cannot be resolved overnight. The housing crisis that they allowed to fester for years cannot be swept under the rug or fixed quickly. The damage inflicted by their negligence runs deep, impacting the lives of millions of Australians who continue to struggle with the high cost of housing and the shortage of affordable housing options. It's abundantly clear that urgent and decisive measures are needed to address the root causes of the housing crisis and provide relief to those who have been left behind.</para>
<para>Australians elected this government to clean up the Liberals' mess, and that's what we've started to do. Since May 2022, this Labor government has continually demonstrated a genuine commitment to addressing Australia's housing challenges head-on. Despite the political games and stalling that the Liberals and their new friends in the Australian Greens want to play with the housing crisis, we are a government that is committed to doing something about this.</para>
<para>Safe and affordable housing is central to the security and dignity of all Australians. Under the National Housing Accord, all states and territories have agreed to an ambitious target of building 1.2 million new homes over five years. And, yes, it is an ambitious target, but it's one that we are determined to achieve. It's ambitious because it needs to be. It would be great if we could wind back that wasted decade and start fixing this problem 10 years ago, but we can't. We're not sitting idle.</para>
<para>On top of that target, the Albanese government has allocated $3 billion for the New Homes Bonus, to get the states to meet and exceed their housing targets. Furthermore, the government has invested in the Housing Support Program, a $500 million funding initiative to kick start housing supply in well-located areas. This program will not only stimulate construction activity but will also ensure that new homes are built in places where they are needed most.</para>
<para>To build these homes, we need workers, so the Albanese government has taken steps to address the shortage of skilled construction workers, which is a key bottleneck in the housing supply chain. By providing fee-free TAFE and through targeted skilled migration, the government is investing in the future of Australia's construction workforce. These investments are paying off, with trade commencements up almost 20 per cent in the government's first year—a clear sign of progress and momentum in the construction sector.</para>
<para>We on this side are also investing in building 40,000 new social and affordable rentals through the Housing Australia Future Fund, and a further 4,000 through the Social Housing Accelerator. The Housing Accord represents the most significant housing reform agenda in a generation—a coordinated effort with states and territories and local government to boost housing supply, improve housing affordability and ensure that all Australians have a safe place to call home.</para>
<para>Those opposite like to come into this place and put forward questions and motions trying to undermine what the government are doing. They seek to blame everyone but themselves for this housing crisis. We saw it today in question time: two disgraceful questions from the opposition seeking to blame migrants and migration for 10 years of housing inaction. Instead of working with the government, we know that the Liberals and the Greens will play politics with this—block or vote against housing solutions—but we'll continue to get on with the job. There's much more to do, but we'll do it.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs McINTOSH</name>
    <name.id>281513</name.id>
    <electorate>Lindsay</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I would like to thank my good friend the member for Hughes for moving this motion highlighting the Albanese Labor government's long shot of providing 1.2 million additional homes over five years. We doubt it will happen and Australians doubt it too, particularly when the New South Wales government has conceded it cannot reach its new build target of 75,000 each year over the next five years. Housing pressures are so topical across greater Sydney, whether you represent Penrith, like I do, or parts of Liverpool and the Sutherland shire like the member for Hughes.</para>
<para>Young people and families are being impacted the most by the three crises that the Albanese is doing nothing real about to tackle. There is a cost-of-living crisis, a mental-health crisis and a housing crisis—a triple whammy that Aussies are battling through under the dark economic headwinds facing mums, dads and small-business owners across Western Sydney and, indeed, the whole country.</para>
<para>Let's take a step back and remember what the Labor party's commitment was on housing at the last election. They said they would get Help to Buy up and running by 1 January 2023. Well, they should have said that they'd halve Medicare-subsidised psychology sessions on that date, because that is the only thing that would have been the truth. Instead, we have Help to Buy before the parliament right now, in February 2024—more than a year later.</para>
<para>It's looking, possibly, to be an election year, with the Albanese Labor government limping to the finish line. In their armour, they want to tick a box and tell the Australian people they tried when it came to housing, but, of course, this program won't really get up and running for a while, and, if it flops, they'll be able to play the 'we ran out of time' card. What Labor forgot to mention at the last election was that, for the scheme to work, all states and territories need to legislate it. Good luck getting that through in time to create any effect soon. The government went to the last election failing to mention that most states already have a shared-equity scheme in place. In New South Wales, we have the Shared Equity Home Buyer Helper scheme. I'm informed by the shadow housing minister that in New South Wales 94 per cent of places in the scheme are still available.</para>
<para>Australians don't want the government owning part of their homes but they do want a government that will implement policies to support first homebuyers and those needing a roof over their heads. The National Housing Finance and Investment Corporation is something that the coalition government put into place. We provided more than $2.9 billion of low-cost loans and supported more than 15,000 social and affordable dwellings across the country. As someone who came into this place having worked in the community housing sector, I understand how vital such financial assistance is to build homes for those who need assistance. I'm informed that we're seeing one in three first homebuyers supported by the coalition's Home Guarantee Scheme. This scheme helps families with deposits as low as five per cent, and single parents with deposits as low as two per cent, to get assistance to enter the market and get the home that they need. And we all know that saving for a deposit is a daunting experience, but our first home super saver scheme is helping tens of thousands of young Aussie families accelerate their deposit.</para>
<para>Let's not forget that the former coalition government's stimulus for the housing and construction sector during COVID saw 137,000 home builder applications which generated $120 billion of economic activity and helped the sector survive in the aftermath of lockdowns. That's why it's such a shame that we have a Labor government presiding over the lowest levels of dwelling construction in over a decade. Forecasts for national and new home builds and renovation activity are slowing even further. You only have to drive down the streets of Western Sydney to see that renovations are slowing. With a housing minister missing in action and the government's key piece of housing policy being introduced in possibly the last year of this parliamentary term, no wonder we're seeing record high numbers of liquidations in the building and construction sector.</para>
<para>Compounding this is the shortage of available construction materials and their increased costs. It's such a shame that this Albanese Labor government is failing our country when it comes to fixing the housing crisis, not only in Western Sydney but in every single pocket of every community we represent.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LAWRENCE</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
    <electorate>Hasluck</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>There is a housing crisis in Australia, and local, state and federal governments must all strive together to solve it. In a complex society, I believe that government has a duty to provide adequate housing for every person, so I thank the member for Hughes for raising the issue of housing with this motion, as housing is an important issue and one which we must address continually in this place.</para>
<para>The motion itself, of course, is quite wrongheaded, and I speak against it for two reasons. Firstly, the motion by the member for Hughes fails to address causes. Does anyone actually think that the housing crisis which exists currently suddenly arose over the last two years? No, they absolutely do not. The member for Hughes has conveniently omitted the fact that we have a housing crisis today due to the inadequate responses by federal and state governments to the issue over a much longer period. The member for Hughes was elected at the same time as I was, in 2022, and perhaps doesn't feel that she should have to carry the can for the inadequate coalition administrations that preceded us. But what is clear, and what we have been reminded of by the sordid <inline font-style="italic">Nemesis</inline> program on the ABC, is that many, or most, coalition members over the nine years before 2022 were much too busy focusing on and hating each other; they preferred that to actually doing the work and making the commitments required to put a roof over anyone's head. Secondly, the motion fails to recognise the work done in two short years by this government, often working closely with the states and sometimes with the Independents and other parties. This is quite surprising, given especially that the Liberal and National parties manage to find themselves getting in the way and slowing this very important legislation down.</para>
<para>So it's a hopeless motion, and one from a party which does not in fact appear to have any policies in this or any other area. I've got some advice, though, for the member for Hughes. Two things are true in politics, and one is that governments must stand on their record come election time—and I'll come to our government's record presently. But what was the coalition's record in housing? It seemed to be around encouraging people without wealth to raid their superannuation balances. The other thing is that prospective governments must offer policy alternatives. Time is running out for the Liberal and National parties to actually create some policies before the next election.</para>
<para>The Albanese government was elected with a mandate to act on housing, and, notwithstanding the lack of respect for the mandate from others in parliament and especially from the coalition, who loved to bleat about mandate when they were in government, we have acted. We have created the Housing Australia Future Fund—$10 billion in perpetuity to support social and affordable housing. The expanded Home Guarantee Scheme is also helping a growing number of key workers, such as teachers, nurses and social workers, to purchase a home, with around 7,720 guarantees issued to key workers in 2022-23, up 37 per cent already from 2021-22. And we announced the $2 billion Social Housing Accelerator in June 2023, which will increase Australia's housing supply by creating thousands of social homes across Australia. We've helped over 10,000 people in regional Australia with the Regional First Home Buyer Guarantee in just its first year, providing a government guarantee of up to 15 per cent for eligible homebuyers so that regional Australians, with a deposit of as little as five per cent, can avoid paying lenders mortgage insurance. We've worked with states and territories to deliver the Help to Buy scheme, supporting up to 40,000 low- and middle-income families to purchase a home of their own through an equity contribution.</para>
<para>This is important work, and I'm sure it's appreciated by one house family after another. It's important all over Australia, not less so in Hasluck, where we have over 53 per cent of families paying a mortgage and a further 18 per cent renting. This week we have the Help to Buy bill in the House. The opposition didn't exactly cover itself in glory with opposing the Housing Australia Future Fund, and it's looking like it's repeating the error with the Help to Buy bill. This is the opposition that's always happy to bleat on about having a mandate when they get elected. The member for Hughes pretends to be interested in housing policy, but she should have supported the Housing Australia Future Fund bill. She should support every other bill brought before this parliament that is aimed at relieving the housing crisis, or she should bring her own bill, rather than motions like this one.</para>
<para>I congratulate Minister Collins on the work she has done thus far to assist tens of thousands of Australians into a home on the great legacy that the HAFF will leave to future generations and on the current bill, which will bring homeownership within the reach of many people who would not be able to access the market without it.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr HAINES</name>
    <name.id>282335</name.id>
    <electorate>Indi</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Hughes for this motion. I'm very pleased to speak about housing. I like to speak about housing. It's so important. Many of us are deeply concerned about housing supply, especially in regional, rural and remote Australia. During the most recent census period, which includes the COVID-19 lockdowns, regional Australia saw a net population gain of 166,000 people. The trend is continuing. The most recent Regional Movers Index, developed by the Regional Australia institute and the Commonwealth Bank, shows it remains 11.7 per cent higher than in prepandemic levels. For years, regional and rural Australians were told, 'Build it, and they will come.' Well, they've come, and we haven't built it. Put simply, we do not have enough affordable housing. We don't have enough social housing. We don't have enough rental housing. We don't have enough diverse housing, and we don't have enough of the critical enabling infrastructure to service any new housing.</para>
<para>Rental vacancy rates in regional Australia hovers at around one per cent, and the median regional house values have increased by over 54 per cent since 2020 and last year. In my regional electorate of Indi, I'm constantly hearing about and seeing the devastating consequences of this lack of supply. My electorate's biggest community housing organisation, Beyond Housing, recently told me that 4,000 people across Indi have unmet housing needs. It's sadly not hard to believe this. For the first time in my over 35 years of living in Indi, I'm seeing people sleeping rough like I've simply never seen before. So I, along with many, say that the government's aim of 1.2 million homes over five years is not just a target; it's a must-do. But we need to come at it from all angles. We need enough tradies to build the homes. We need the right infrastructure in place to support growing communities. We need to attract investors, and we need a greater diversity in future housing developments, including medium-density housing developments in regional Australia. These were some of the key recommendations made by the over-300 delegates at the National Regional Housing Summit held a couple of weeks ago here in Canberra. Local councils, community housing providers, lenders and real estate agents came together not just to describe the housing crisis in regional, rural and remote Australia but to offer solutions.</para>
<para>I want to focus on one of the summit's key recommendations: dedicated and increased funding for regional local governments for critical housing infrastructure. Since 2022, I have been calling for the government to fund a $2 billion regional housing infrastructure fund to do just this. It is not sexy to talk about it but the key to more housing supply in the regions is providing local governments with grant funding for sewerage, for drainage, for pavement. The lack of a building and construction workforce is certainly also a key handbrake on more housing. But when I talk to my local building companies and housing developers, they consistently tell me that the No. 1 thing they need is a lot more lots that are connected to the water mains and the sewerage.</para>
<para>But with a small ratepayer base, the local councils in regional and rural areas simply do not have the funs to build this infrastructure on their own. They need a leg-up from government, which is where my regional housing infrastructure fund comes in. I have not pulled $2 billion out of thin air. We need at least 30,000 new homes to meet the demand in regional Australia and it costs around $75,000 to build the infrastructure needed to unlock a new home. This means that more than $2 billion is required to meet that demand.</para>
<para>I acknowledge that the government has recognised the need for critical enabling infrastructure to address the housing shortage through the Housing Support Program, and this program was announced last year using almost exactly my language. But this $500 million is for all of Australia and it will force small regional councils to compete against their metropolitan counterparts. What the government has announced is still a long way off delivering what the one-third of Australians who live outside of the metropolitan areas in rural and regional Australia, frankly, deserve.</para>
<para>Now, the opposition talk a lot about the government's failed housing plans, but I am not seeing them put forward one single solution of their own. As an independent, I did not come to this place to only make complaints; I came here with solutions. Those at the forefront of the regional housing crisis back the regional housing infrastructure fund that I put forward and it is time that members of this place, both the opposition and the government, did so too.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SITOU</name>
    <name.id>298121</name.id>
    <electorate>Reid</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Hughes for this motion. I think she is perhaps the only member from those opposite who actually cares about housing, because if we are to look at their record, look at what they did on housing, it clearly demonstrates that they had very little interest in addressing the housing affordability crisis that was brewing.</para>
<para>The Abbott government abolished the National Housing Supply Council. The council was established under the Rudd Labor government to monitor housing demand, supply and affordability in Australia. It gave us a better understanding of the problem. Now that is gone. The former housing minister, the member for Deakin, failed to convene a meeting of state and territory housing ministers. It begs the question: what was he doing when he was housing minister? This is a wicked challenge that requires three levels of government working together—development approvals at the council level, planning policy at the state level, infrastructure spend at the state and federal levels. We need three levels of government working together yet the previous minister for housing could not even get everyone in the same room in the five years that he was housing minister.</para>
<para>This motion here talks about the lack of skilled workers. I agree with the member for Hughes because there is a critical lack of skilled workers, particularly in the construction sector. But let's look at how long it takes to complete an apprenticeship—three to four years. Some apprenticeships take six years. So if we go back three to four years, who was in government then? Those opposite. This skills crisis that those opposite talk about, and which we readily admit to, is a skills crisis that was brewing, again, for a long time and that those opposite failed to address.</para>
<para>We, on this side of the House, are doing the hard work to address the skills shortage. We are providing fee-free TAFE. If you want to do a cert III in bricklaying, that's free. A cert II in construction is free. We are making the hard choices and hard decisions to ensure that we've got the skilled workers to complete the necessary construction to address the housing affordability crisis.</para>
<para>The one idea we have from those opposite, so far, is superannuation. This is their one golden ticket, their one golden egg that they go to every time there's an issue that they have to pay for. They go and raid super balances. Again, it's a bad idea because housing experts, finance experts and economic experts all agree that this won't solve the issue of housing affordability. In fact, it's likely to make it worse because you're adding to demand.</para>
<para>Ultimately, a key part of the housing affordability crisis is the lack of supply. That's why it is a key plank in what the Albanese Labor government is doing to address the housing affordability issue. We are increasing supply. We're doing that through the Housing Affordability Future Fund, we're giving incentives for build-to-rent, and, importantly, we are financing the National Housing Infrastructure Facility to ensure that we are building the critical infrastructure that is required when you build new homes—things like public transport and utilities. That's something that the former New South Wales government failed to do when they were building in greenfield sites and failing to provide adequate education facilities or roads.</para>
<para>The other three major areas that we're concentrating on include providing direct assistance to the most vulnerable through our 15 per cent increase in rental assistance and institutional reform by providing national leadership. We've reconvened the National Housing Supply and Affordability Council to ensure that we have evidence based recommendations, and we have finally convened state and territory housing ministers. We are also assisting first home buyers through the expanded First Home Guarantee and Help to Buy schemes.</para>
<para>In Australia, we have major iconic infrastructure, such as the Sydney Harbour Bridge, the Opera House, the Snowy Hydro. We are a country obsessed with major infrastructure projects, and I think our next one should be housing.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WALLACE</name>
    <name.id>265967</name.id>
    <electorate>Fisher</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I was the chair of the Social Policy and Legal Affairs Committee in the last parliament, for a period of it anyway, and we did a very extensive inquiry in relation to housing and homelessness. As you may be aware, I was a builder, a carpenter and joiner by trade, and a barrister who specialised in construction law. Apart from my eight years in this place, I've made a living out of the building industry in one way, shape or form. I know the industry pretty well. And I know that the building and construction industry is on its knees in Queensland and in much of Australia. They're struggling because they can't get materials. They're struggling because they can't get trades. There is absolute a very significant skills shortage at the moment, and it's a skills shortage that has been going on not just through this government or the last government; I'm talking about a skills shortage over the last 20 or even 30 years.</para>
<para>There has been a very significant change in the way this government—in fact, our country—operates, particularly in relation to apprentices. You can't have an industry of the future if you don't train the skills of the future. Sadly, over the last several decades, we've seen a move away from apprenticeship based training in this country. We have seen a real dearth, and, particularly under this government, we've seen an incredible drop-off in the number of apprentices. But I do concede that this has been going on over a long period of decades. When I make my way around and talk to people on building sites and talk to my old mates in the game, there has been a very significant shift in the way that builders operate. There is a real reluctance to put apprentices on these days. As someone who was an apprentice and who also used to employ apprentices, I understand that. It's a big commitment, particularly for a small operation to take on a young person for four years. The old term was 'indentured', and that's exactly what they are. They are indentured to their master or mistress for four years. It's a long time.</para>
<para>We are an industry that is changing daily. It's boom or bust. The building industry has ever been thus—boom or bust. I've seen a few booms. I've certainly seen a few busts. It is a very tough way to make a dollar. What we are seeing now is that those chickens are coming home to roost. The building industry just simply cannot keep up with the number of homes that we need to build. When we were in government we did some valiant work, I have to say, through things like the HomeBuilder program. After COVID hit, the industry was facing a valley of death. I spoke with the then housing minister. It was mainly him, but I fed some information to him, and HomeBuilder was created.</para>
<para>HomeBuilder was a tremendous program that enabled a lot of builders to keep working through the pandemic, because they were facing an economic cliff; there's absolutely no doubt about that. Builders would have failed and gone over that cliff in their thousands, and HomeBuilder saved a great number of them. But what we're seeing now is that the number of insolvencies are increasing out of sight. That is of great concern to me because it's an industry that is very close and dear to my heart. I've seen it time and time again, both as a practitioner and as a builder: these men and women take great pride in their work.</para>
<para>Where I'm going with all of this is that if we don't have builders, if we don't have subcontractors, if we don't have apprentices, we can't build the homes for Australians. What that does is drive up the costs. It's supply and demand. If you have fewer people doing the work, it drives up the costs of building materials and labour, and that makes it even more unaffordable for Australians.</para>
<para>The coalition government did some fantastic work when we were in government. I want to congratulate the former housing minister, because he did some terrific work. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms ROBERTS</name>
    <name.id>157125</name.id>
    <electorate>Pearce</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We have been progressing the debate on the Help to Buy bill and highlighting other aspects of the Albanese Labor government's housing reforms, and yet here we are with this motion before us. Truly, it beggars belief that those opposite just can't find it within themselves to support measures that are designed to assist Australians achieve housing security. I would have thought that the member for the electorate of Hughes, which is located in the southern and south-western suburbs of Sydney, would welcome such reforms on behalf of her 150,000-plus residents.</para>
<para>A decade of little action by the former Liberal-National government, along with a pandemic and global issues, have left us with significant challenges across the country. That said, we can't afford to put our heads in the sand and do nothing, which appears to be the approach of the former government. That is why the Albanese Labor government struck the National Housing Accord between the Commonwealth, the state and territory governments, local government, institutional investors and the construction sector to address the nation's housing challenges. All states and territories have agreed to extend the National Housing Accord target to 1.2 million new homes over five years from 1 July 2024. This target is ambitious because it needs to be.</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government understands that safe and affordable housing are central to the security and dignity of all Australians. We also understand that we need long-term investment and reform to boost the construction of new homes. The Albanese Labor government's expansive housing agenda will support the states and territories and the construction industry to significantly boost the supply of new homes. We are working to improve the supply of skilled construction workers through access to free-free TAFE and targeted migration. We have added an additional 300,000 fee-free TAFE places from 2024 to 2026 for priority areas, including construction, and we are working on supply chain issues and investing in more locally manufactured products, including measures to boost timber supply.</para>
<para>It is worth reiterating a few points about what we are doing to help Australians achieve their dream of homeownership. I'll start with the $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund. This fund will support 40,000 new social and affordable rental homes right across the country in its first five years, including 4,000 homes through the Social Housing Accelerator for women and children impacted by family and domestic violence or older women at risk of homelessness. The fund will also deliver $200 million for the repair, maintenance and improvement of housing in remote Indigenous communities, $100 million for crisis and transitional housing options for women and children at risk, and $30 million to build housing for veterans who are experiencing homelessness or at risk of homelessness.</para>
<para>As stated previously, we are working with the states and territories to help them meet the ambitious new national target to build 1.2 million new homes over five years, through the $3 billion New Homes Bonus and the Housing Support Program, a $500 million competitive funding program for local and state governments which will help kickstart housing supply in well located areas. States will have flexibility in how they permanently boost social housing stock with this funding, including new builds, expanding existing programs, or renovating or refurbishing existing currently uninhabitable housing stock. We have a National Housing and Homelessness Agreement and have already delivered $181.9 million to Western Australia in 2023. This includes funding for homelessness services.</para>
<para>We said we would move quickly and effectively to address our nation's housing issues, and we are, with the most significant, carefully considered housing reform agenda in a generation, so more Australians will have a safe place to call home. There will be new homes for people to buy, new homes to rent and more affordable housing for those in need. Unlike those opposite, who just say no to every policy idea put before them, we are getting on with the job at hand, and that is particularly so in Western Australia.</para>
<para>Planning reform is long overdue. The changes being implemented will make it easier, quicker and cheaper to build a house. They will help to improve the availability of well-located land to accommodate more housing. The government's housing reforms are considered, comprehensive, guided by expert advice and delivered in partnership with all governments, with industry and with community sectors. I do not support the motion.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The time allotted for this debate has now expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Regional Australia</title>
          <page.no>174</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs PHILLIPS</name>
    <name.id>147140</name.id>
    <electorate>Gilmore</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes the Government recently published <inline font-style="italic">Informing Regional Investment: State of Australia's Regions 2024</inline> which provides evidence and insights on contemporary topics of interest across Australia's diverse regions;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) considers the 2024 report focuses on contemporary and pressing issues as identified at the local level, including:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) ensuring regional workforces are positioned to meet the needs of today and tomorrow;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) promoting the economic aspirations, cultures and languages of First Nations people;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) supporting places with amenity, services and economic opportunities;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) collaboratively addressing issues like housing availability and affordability and access to quality early childhood education and care;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) preparing for, responding to, and recovering from disasters; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(f) responding to challenges and opportunities as we transition to a net zero emissions future; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) commends the current Government for their ongoing commitment to advance the lives of regional Australia.</para></quote>
<para>I'm really honoured to move this private member's motion today on the state of Australia's regions, because where I live, on the New South Wales South Coast, we know how important regional Australia is. Our regions are the backbone of our nation. I want to thank the member for Hunter in advance for seconding this motion, because he knows how important regional Australia is, and I thank all speakers who will speak on this motion.</para>
<para>Of course, the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government and the Minister for Regional Development, Local Government and Territories know how important our regions are. That's why the Australian government recently launched a new report to inform how we can together best develop sustainable regions. The <inline font-style="italic">State </inline><inline font-style="italic">of Australia's </inline><inline font-style="italic">regions </inline><inline font-style="italic">2024</inline> report plays an important part in supporting our regions to respond to challenges and harness opportunities. We know that more and more people are moving to our regions, and we must take advantage of the shifts underway to benefit our regions as they grow. The report takes a look at key issues and opportunities, and I want to go through some of these now. First of all, ensuring our regional workforces are positioned to meet the needs of today and tomorrow is why, when we came to government, we put a focus on jobs and skills. We held a jobs summit and we have put people at the forefront of regional growth with the employment white paper; fee-free TAFE, which is bringing more local tradies to TAFE and apprenticeships; regional university hubs—and I want to send a shout out to our very own Country Universities Centre at Ulladulla; and a new migration strategy. And of course our tax cuts, to be delivered from 1 July, will overwhelmingly support regional Australians, with 87 per cent of people in my electorate of Gilmore set to receive a bigger tax cut.</para>
<para>Targeted investments in regional infrastructure are vital. That's why I'm ecstatic we recently marked the start of major construction on the Jervis Bay flyover, with $100 million in federal funding by the Albanese Labor government. There's $752 million in federal funding for the Milton Ulladulla bypass and $97 million for the Nowra bypass. We're investing in better regional services. Our federal Medicare Urgent Care Clinic at Batemans Bay is open and in its first two months saw 1,900 patients, all bulk billed. Our headspace at Kiama is making pleasing progress. We've tripled the Medicare bulk-billing incentives for seniors, concession card holders and students, and, pleasingly, we've already seen bulk-billing rates increase by 4.3 per cent on the South Coast. We've made medicines cheaper, and in Gilmore that's already saved people $1.3 million in medicine costs. We've made child care cheaper, benefiting around 4,800 families in Gilmore.</para>
<para>My electorate has been pummelled by natural disasters, but we're getting on with improving assistance in disasters. We announced the natural disaster Infrastructure Betterment Fund, which sees additional federal funding to assist our local councils, and I'm pleased road such as Jamberoo Mountain Road, Wallaby Hill Road, Illaroo Road and North Head Drive at Moruya have all benefited. Just a few weeks ago I helped to officially open the upgraded Artie Smith Oval, another Bushfire Local Economic Recovery project with federal funding. The composite bushfire-proof power poles at South Durras are now up and working—another election commitment delivered. The list goes on: the Bawley Point microgrid, which is another great project, has been switched on and helps protect the electricity supply to Bawley Point.</para>
<para>Just last week, I was proud to stand with the member for South Coast and the New South Wales minister for planning when an increase to the South Coast Build-to-Rent project was announced. We have comprehensive plans in place to increase affordable and social housing supply through our National Housing Accord, and our Housing Australia Future Fund is open for expressions of interest.</para>
<para>My region, like all regions, has challenges. How we respond and start to tackle these challenges to set us up for the future is what I am passionate about. That's why I welcome the <inline font-style="italic">Informing Regional Investment: State of Australia's Regions 2024</inline>, which helps provide a framework for the better policies we're implementing to help our regions—in my region and right across Australia.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Repacholi</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr HAINES</name>
    <name.id>282335</name.id>
    <electorate>Indi</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Regional Australia is the driving force of our economy, but the regions are so much more than their economic contribution alone. They are places to raise a family and they're places to experience the best of tight knit communities. But regional Australia faces its share of challenges too, which the recent state of the nation report makes all too clear. This report is part of the Regional Investment Framework announced in last year's budget as the government's approach to delivering regional investment. It sets out priority areas for investment implementation, but even before I turned to page 1 I could have said what those priority areas are. People across my electorate constantly tell me that in areas like housing, health care, education and child care, regional Australians are not getting a fair go and it's holding us back.</para>
<para>This is the government's flagship report on the regions, but all it does is outline national policies and add 'including regional Australia'. Now that is not good enough. Regional Australia should not be an afterthought to policy designed for the cities. Regional communities know what the problems are and we know the solutions too.</para>
<para>We need a vision for how government will take advantage of the strengths and the highlights of our regions. This starts with targeted policies that address the unique challenges in regional, rural and remote communities—policies that are place based. For example, in my electorate of Indi, the housing crisis is all too real. I know that for families in my electorate, it's never been harder to find a home.</para>
<para>At the National Regional Housing Summit earlier this month, the regions spoke with a unified voice and supported my calls for a dedicated regional housing infrastructure fund. Unfortunately, this government has announced no targeted housing solutions for regional Australia. It has rejected my amendments to dedicate 30 per cent of housing funding to the regions and is silent on my proposal for a regional housing infrastructure fund. But regional Australia desperately needs this funding. Without addressing housing supply, we can't house our current population, let alone the essential workers that we need. We need more nurses, more early-childhood educators, more teachers, more electricians, more engineers and more planners in the regions.</para>
<para>In the next decade alone, Australia will need more than 210,000 new workers to drive the energy transition. And guess what? These jobs will disproportionately be in rural and regional Australia. The economic opportunities from this are enormous, if we harness them. But we must include ways to share these profits to ensure that a fair share of the benefits from this renewable energy transformation actually goes to the communities hosting the solar, the wind and the transmission infrastructure that are driving the energy transition. This starts with making the necessary investments in affordable and accessible education and training.</para>
<para>Like many of the policy challenges we face in regional Australia, the energy transition also represents great opportunity. But this report gave me no sense that the government understands how to respond to our challenges or our opportunities. On that note, both the <inline font-style="italic">S</inline><inline font-style="italic">tate</inline><inline font-style="italic"> of Australia's R</inline><inline font-style="italic">egions</inline> report and the recently released University Accord review recommend expanding the Regional University Study Hubs program. I'm pleased to see this—and there's much else in the University Accord review document that I am happy about.</para>
<para>In my electorate, hubs in Wangaratta, Mansfield and Corryong are helping to close the education gap, and I am supporting the push for additional hubs in Murrindindi and Benalla. By making it easier for young Australians to take up apprenticeships and study at regional universities and TAFEs, we can ensure regional communities actively shape their future and are not shaped by it.</para>
<para>There's another piece to this complex puzzle: a commitment to fix the lack of available and affordable child care in regional communities. In towns across my electorate, there are more children than childcare places, creating lengthy waitlists. I want the government to listen to the Productivity Commission and the ACCC and invest properly in regional child care.</para>
<para>So, while I commend the government for publishing the <inline font-style="italic">State of Australia's Regions</inline> report, there is so much more work to be done. As a proud regional Independent, I won't stop pushing this government to make the investments that unlock regional potential. But we need a clear and targeted plan—not just a report, but a plan. We need a demonstration of government leadership that will set the regions up for a prosperous future, for now and well into the future. Let's harness the strengths of regional Australia; let's get on with the job; let's target policies towards regional, rural and remote Australia.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REPACHOLI</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to support this motion by my good friend the member for Gilmore. The Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government recently released the informative <inline font-style="italic">State of Australia's regions 2024</inline> report, which is a crucial step forward towards understanding and addressing the needs of our regional communities. The report offers insights into how we can best develop sustainable regions and capitalise on opportunities while addressing challenges.</para>
<para>First and foremost, it is imperative to acknowledge the pivotal role our regions play in the prosperity of our nation. As we navigate economic shifts, it is essential to support our regions in leveraging these challenges for their benefit.</para>
<para>The report examines critical issues and opportunities facing regions, pinpointed at the grassroots level through the Regional Development Australia network. It also uses data and insight from trusted sources like the Australian Bureau of Statistics, the Regional Data Hub and the Regional Australia Institute.</para>
<para>The report also shows that our government is committed to taking charge of regional policies again. We aim to coordinate and target our investments across different parts of the government more effectively. This is made possible through the Regional Investment Framework announced in the last budget. The report also recognises the significant contribution that regional Australia makes to our nation, while highlighting some of the pressures and opportunities arising in the regions as our world continues to change. It is vital that governments, industries and communities have the information required to navigate these challenges and to support evidence based planning, prioritisation and investment.</para>
<para>The report also tells us what we as a government have been doing to tackle these challenges. In our last two budgets we have introduced over 350 plans and measures to help regional communities. These include: programs that focus on helping people in regional areas to get better jobs, like the employment white paper, and providing hundreds of thousands of fee-free TAFE positions; our tax cuts, to be delivered from 1 July, will overwhelmingly support regional Australians; investing billions of dollars into building things like roads and bridges in regional areas; making homes more affordable; getting ready for and recovering from disasters like the floods that ripped through the Hunter in 2022; and providing services such as health care and child care in regional and rural parts of Australia through increases to bulk-billing and rolling out Medicare Urgent Care Clinics like the one in my electorate in the Hunter. We're also about to have a Head to Health mental health clinic open its doors very shortly in Muswellbrook. We're supporting regional businesses and industries by setting up programs like the Powering the Regions Fund, our $15 billion investment in the National Reconstruction Fund, the Critical Mineral Strategy and the THRIVE 2030 tourism strategy. All these things are being rolled out by a Labor government.</para>
<para>But 'compare the pair': when we came to government we inherited a bucket of rorts and some of the most incompetent administration of grants funding ever seen. There were things like the Building Better Regions Fund and the Community Development Grants. And who could forget the sports rorts? The list goes on and on. Let's just have a look at the Community Development Grants program rort. More than 120 projects weren't contracted by the previous government. Nine of the projects dated back to 2016 and six of the projects had no proponent at all. This was just business as usual from those opposite, but we're restoring integrity to these regional grants programs. We're providing certainty and fairness to regional communities and we'll invest $1 billion over the next three years in our new regional grants program. These will improve liveability in our regional towns and cities, in partnership with local government and the community.</para>
<para>We also know that success lies in listening to our communities and local voices that know their region best. The last couple of years have seen significant population growth across all regions, including the Hunter. Many regions are finding it difficult to meet local workforce demands, with job advertisements doubling between 2019 and 2023. The continued growth of freight transported on our regional roads is a good example of why targeted investment in infrastructure is needed for growth and liveability. We're listening to regional Australia because we have great local members who are helping to shape policy. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:53</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WALLACE</name>
    <name.id>265967</name.id>
    <electorate>Fisher</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I am a proud regional member of the federal parliament representing regional Queenslanders—the Sunshine Coast; the beautiful, the magnificent Sunshine Coast! I'm very proud because I represent amazing people and amazing businesses in a magnificent part of the world. But we all remember that Telstra ad, where the woman sticks her head out the window when she realises that her secretary hasn't paid for the Yellow Pages and she says, 'Not happy, Jan.' Well, I'm not happy today and I will tell you why, Mr Deputy Speaker Wilkie: two years ago the federal member for Fairfax and I stood up and announced that we had secured $1.6 billion for heavy passenger rail to come into the Sunshine Coast. For two years we tried to kick and drag the state Labor government into action to match the former coalition's government $1.6 billion commitment to rail into the Sunshine Coast. For two years the state Labor government did absolutely nothing. They sat on their hands. For two years they dithered, they delayed and they made up every excuse under the sun as to why this could not be done. And low and behold, yesterday morning the new Labor Premier stood up and said, 'Do you know what? We are going to do this but we will not do it all.' So because this state Labor government delayed for two years, we have seen costs blow out from an estimated cost of $3.2 billion to somewhere between $5 billion and $7 billion But here is the rub: it is only for one-third of the job. This state Labor government now wants to build rail into one of the fastest-growing regions in our country where we are going to be hosting the Olympics and the Paralympic games in 2032 and it is only going to take the rail from Beerwah to Caloundra, not Beerwah-Caloundra-Kiwana-Maroochydore. So we are getting one-third of the rail for more than twice the price. The state Labor government should hang their heads in shame.</para>
<para>There is also a degree of culpability from this federal government as well because, when this federal government came into power, they, of course, announced their now infamous 90-day review, which dragged all infrastructure projects out almost for eternity. This 90-day review was more like a 12-month or 18-month review. When the Labor federal government finally made an announcement, it was that they are setting aside the $1.6 billion that the former coalition government had committed to. Of course, you would know, Mr Deputy Speaker Wilkie, that, as a lawyer, when you set something aside, you are rejecting it. They are setting it aside. What does that mean? Does that mean they are putting it aside and reserving it or that they are rejecting it? We cannot get straight answers out of the federal infrastructure minister as to what they are going to be doing with their planned $1.6 billion that the former coalition government committed to. We also had to drag this Labor government kicking and screaming to keep that funding.</para>
<para>In the last few moments that I have, those members opposite talk the big talk about housing. But in this 90-day review this federal government scrapped $160 million from the Mooloolah River Interchange. More than 100 families were evicted from their homes to build the Mooloolah River Interchange. More than 100 homes were demolished to build this interchange. Now $160 million has been ripped out of it by this callous federal government and the project may not even go ahead at all. How is that fair? Those members opposite talk the big talk about infrastructure and housing but they just do not care.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BRIAN MITCHELL</name>
    <name.id>129164</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyons</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The last thing we will be doing is taking lectures from those opposite about housing. I mean, here is the Albanese Labor government putting $10 billion into the Housing Australia Future Fund. We have a bill before the House for Help to Buy to get 40,000 low-income, middle-income and young Australians into their own homes. We have the biggest Commonwealth rent assistance increase for 30 years, so we are not going to be taking lectures from those opposite about the state of the housing market in Australia after 10 years of neglect and utter failure. I have been very proud to represent regional Tasmania in this place for almost eight years; three-quarters of that, unfortunately, under a coalition government. Here's hoping for many more years of Labor government so we can get that percentage up under a Labor government.</para>
<para>I have heard the cries for help from our regional communities for more support over years of Liberal governments. I was very proud to be able to hold the Liberal government to account and to also play a part in seeing the real change that the Albanese Labor government is making in Australia's regions in just 21 months. It would be remiss of me to talk about holding the former government to account without mentioning robodebt and the terrible impact that that disgraceful, illegal program had on people in the regions. The people opposite were in government for 10 years and did nothing about robodebt and the damage it inflicted on so many Australians, and on so many regional Australians.</para>
<para>One of my first speeches in this place was during an MPI—a matter of public importance—on the topic of rural and regional Australia, where I spoke on declining levels of regional health care, outdated telecommunications and the cost-of-living concerns. That is the legacy of 10 years of failed Liberal government. The Labor Party came into power inheriting not only those problems but also the grants rorts and the poor administration of regional grants funding. We're cleaning the mess up. In the Building Better Regions Fund, for example, there were more than 120 projects uncontracted by the previous government. Nine dated back to 2016. There were more than $18 million worth of projects with no locations. Of course grants under the Building Better Regions Fund favoured National Party electorates and were not based on merit. Neither were there any rules. The only rule was: was it a marginal seat or a seat that the Liberals and Nationals could win votes out of? A dartboard or a chocolate wheel would have brought fairer outcomes for Australia's regions.</para>
<para>It's time to restore integrity and fairness to regional funding, and that's what the Labor government is doing. I welcome our recently launched report, <inline font-style="italic">State of Australia's Regions 2024</inline>, which willinform regional development. I thank the member for Gilmore for bringing on this motion. The report takes a look at key issues, identifies opportunities for our regions and recognises how regional Australia significantly contributes to the nation. We have heard what matters to our regions, like addressing healthcare challenges. There are many. We acknowledge them, and we are getting on the job of addressing them and fixing them.</para>
<para>We're already making our mark in this area in my electorate. In November 2022 I established a committee to tackle the shortage of GPs across regional Tasmania in concert with colleagues in the state government. It has paid off. The state government came on board. In the healthcare sector more generally, this committee has helped address some of the issues in my electorate. The primary care committee brought together the rural workforce agency, the primary health network, consumers and other stakeholders, including local and state government representatives, to develop a plan of action to fix the shortfall we have.</para>
<para>Our government's investing around $12 million in a single-employer model trial that we are trialling with the Tasmanian government, where the state government is the single employer of GPs. It's working. It's been a resounding success. We have funded up to 42 GPs to be employed under the single-employer model. We've also made investments in an innovative new community health model trial on Tasmania's east coast with cohealth, improving access by working with the community by offering healthcare options that suit their needs. There is no overnight fix, but it's real progress. The report also shows how, in the space of just two budgets, we have provided 350 packages targeted to strengthen our regional communities.</para>
<para>I could go on: the impact of fee-free TAFE, child care and the investments in Medicare. We are putting our attention on the regions, and only a Labor government is doing it.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr WEBSTER</name>
    <name.id>281688</name.id>
    <electorate>Mallee</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to speak to the member for Gilmore's motion. As a fellow regional MP, I am thankful for her support as a co-chair of the Parliamentary Friends of Rural and Regional Health. Later this week we will be promoting heart health in parliament. Regional health is in crisis, particularly when it comes to workforce. In my role as shadow assistant minister for regional health, I know how vital primary health care is in regional Australia to prevent the need for acute care services. I am sure the member for Gilmore may well have been glad to have the Prime Minister visit the weekend before last for the New South Wales Country Labor Conference. Country Labor—now that's an endangered species! It's almost a tautology now. Regional Australians have worked Labor out. The Prime Minister claimed at the Country Labor Conference that the Nationals don't represent their seats in regional Australia and that we are nothing like the people we represent. How ridiculous!</para>
<para>Nowhere are Labor's hypocrisy and its tin ear for regional Australia clearer than in health care. One of health minister Mark Butler's first acts as incoming minister in 2022 was to change the distribution priority areas for international medical graduates, bleeding the regions dry of doctors. We desperately need those doctors, yet this motion claims Labor is advancing the lives of regional Australia. In my electorate of Malley, we have towns where there are no doctors and others where the last doctor would retire but is hanging in there because nobody is replacing him and he is committed to the local community. I dare say some will die with their boots on.</para>
<para>I spoke last sitting week about Labor's hunger for regional wealth to fund their election campaigns. Regional Australia is the piggy bank Labor love to smash, whether it is empty or not, to hunt for whatever loose change they can find to fund their metropolitan election priorities. Nowhere is this clearer right now than in their family car tax, where an SUV or LandCruiser will cost between $10,000 and $25,000 more on current estimates to fund the uptake of electric vehicles in Labor, teal and Green seats in the city. The EV uptake in Toorak, Melbourne, is 24 times that of Mildura or Horsham in my electorate. Do you think that Labor's family car tax will change that ratio? No, it will get worse for the people in Mallee, who will be paying that $10,000 for Higgins residents to show off their new EV at the Royal South Yarra Lawn Tennis Club. Nobody seriously thinks EVs will be deployed en masse in the regions. A dealer in my electorate told me as much this week and pointed out the potential tens of thousands of dollars someone will have to pay to replace an EV battery. A visitor to my electorate was recently stranded in their EV after they didn't get the expected 500 kilometres out of their battery. Labor pretend they can go the distance, whether it is EVs or renewable energy policy, when the reality simply does not stack up.</para>
<para>Labor are bloodthirsty to kill the regional golden goose wherever they can, whether it is strangling farms in thousands of kilometres of massive transmission lines, gigantic wind turbines, blanketing farms in solar panels or ripping up prime agricultural land without social licence to extract rare earths for—guess what—EV batteries. Labor's biosecurity levy hits farmers by the costs incurred by importers. As the 2022 Australian Biosecurity Award winner for industry, Trevor Randford, said last week:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Our farmers are contending with high costs of production, high costs of living for primary producer families, high electricity costs, a retail sector out of control, increased levels of legislation and regulations in relation to labour and industrial relations, water buy-backs in the Murray Darling Basin, increased incidences of exotic pests and diseases and now the straw that will break the camel's back—a $50 million annual biosecurity tax.</para></quote>
<para>As Trevor mentioned, Labor buy water from desperate farmers for the environment when the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder doesn't even know what to do with all the water they've bought. The government are now the biggest water holder in the Murray-Darling Basin, and for 15 years they have not used 30 per cent of their entitlements each year. Why do they need more? Oh, yes—to stave off the Greens in Sydney and Melbourne from Labor seats.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SCRYMGOUR</name>
    <name.id>F2S</name.id>
    <electorate>Lingiari</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to speak in support of the motion that has been brought forward by the member for Gilmore, and I just want to put it in the context of my electorate of Lingiari, which is about 1.1 million square kilometres. As I've said before in this place, it covers 76 remote communities and over 500 homelands—quite a vast part of the Northern Territory. It stretches from the saltwater country in the Top End to the deserts of Central Australia. As in other regional seats, I think some of the challenges in reaching our communities and dealing with our constituents are extremely difficult, particularly during the seasonal times such as we're seeing with the wet season, where we've seen many floods. There are communities, particularly in regional Northern Territory—places in the Barkly and Borroloola—where we're now facing the challenge for the first time of getting food drops, particularly going into those Gulf communities and homelands. There are challenges that certainly confront us in places like Lingiari.</para>
<para>Looking at some of those challenges, I want to pick up on one issue that we're addressing through action which will go a long way towards assisting particularly the young people in my electorate through the Real Jobs Program. The only way we're going to look at stimulating the economy and also make sure that those communities can have a positive outcome and build their economy is by having a jobs program. I think the Real Jobs Program is going to be really important for providing that pathway in the Top End.</para>
<para>When I was running the Northern Land Council, we started a program which was called the Learning on Country program. That program looked at how we address school attendance—how we get young people to engage in school and stay in school—and it looked at that pathway from school into a full-time job. That program went from having 200 young people participating to nearly 600 young people participating across a lot of the schools in the Top End. It is a success, and I think it's a success that we can build on, showing that one way to engage young people in the education system is to give them that pathway and that self belief that there is a pathway from school into a job. The Learning on Country program—which then has a pathway to a range of other programs, including learning on country, caring for country and playing a role in the environment, whether it's land or sea—is tailored particularly to build that economy on the ground in those communities. Given some of the challenges we have in remote Northern Territory communities, I think we have to look at things creatively and think outside of the square as to what we are going to do.</para>
<para>The state of Australia's regions report looked at some of the areas, and a couple of those were regional workforces in meeting the needs of today and tomorrow, and promoting economic aspirations. But the culture and the language of First Nations people need to be part of that process so that we can capitalise on the strengths of those communities and Aboriginal people. That way, we'll be able to get the best outcome, not just for the community but particularly for families in those communities. I think if those families can see their young people working and engaged, we will see a better outcome for those communities. That should be what we all aspire to; we should all work with those communities to try and get the best outcomes for Aboriginal people, particularly in those remote communities. The reality is that we're not going to get the big multibillion-dollar companies investing in those communities, so we have to look at how we build those small economies to make sure that they can participate.</para>
<para>I fully support the motion brought forward by my colleague. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BROADBENT</name>
    <name.id>MT4</name.id>
    <electorate>Monash</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>What a marvellous member for Lingiari you have proved to be! You had big shoes to fill and you've done a great job. It's obviously your experience and your ability that has led you to this place and to you making a great contribution. Congratulations!</para>
<para>Regions, and particularly my region, supply the water, the milk, supply the exports and supply the electricity. The regions deliver for Australia. You've heard from all the speakers that we're not getting a fair share of the pie, and that's been argued by government since I came here in the Hawke-Keating years. But let me say this to you. Under the earth in the Latrobe Valley we have thousands of years of supply of brown coal and yet we closed Hazelwood without a replacement. We'll close another power station without a replacement shortly, and we'll close another power station after that without a replacement. If we think that wind and solar are going to do it then every report that I read and everything that I've seen says that we can't do that; the technology isn't there.</para>
<para>What's happening in the regions overseas? China is more than happy, as said in Chris Mitchell's article in the <inline font-style="italic">Australian</inline> today, to profit from countries which are willing to sacrifice themselves at the altar of the church of carbon. And they're even happier to recycle those profits in securing coal at prices lower than they would otherwise be if so much international demand hadn't been removed voluntarily from the market, like we're doing. In fact, every discussion I've had here today or listened to, especially from government members, has been the government kicking themselves in the foot. That's except for the member for Lingiari who said: 'We're not going to get these big companies. We have problems in our region because of the very make-up of the seat of Lingiari.' I think that anyone who has a regional seat knows about those difficulties of transport and opportunity—even needing to have a licence to have a job. There are all those issues, and they're the ones which become extremely important.</para>
<para>I can't understand why a nation such as this, with the resources that we have—like those exposed in the Latrobe Valley—can't do what the Germans have done. The Germans have said: 'We can't rely on this renewable energy; it's not working the way we thought it would work. So we have built the very best efficient coal-fired power station that we could.' It's brand-new—the Germans, in Europe, building a new station. The Chinese are building the capacity of our whole power system every week—every week! And Australia is closing ours down and we produce approximately one per cent of the world's emissions. Some say it's three per cent and some say it's one. I don't know if it's one or three, but it's minute compared to the rest of the world. The rest of the world is getting on and doing what they need to do on behalf of their people. All I'm asking for the regions is that we have the resources to fulfil the energy needs of this nation and yet there are lots of barriers—whether that be for nuclear power or new coal-fired power stations—because state governments decide what they will do with those resources and not the federal government. We can give a lead and say, 'We'll help you to pay for it,' but we have no control.</para>
<para>If companies have sold off their power stations and aren't fixing the existing power stations to make them last then once again Australia is kicking itself in the foot. My experience tells me that there will be blackouts, and that's when the Australian people, when they have their backs to the wall, will say: 'No, sorry, enough! We want power and we wanted today.' There are two gas-fired power stations in Victoria, and they'll be running full-time. Everyone will say hooray except for the people who haven't produced the amount of gas in the ground which we could use. There is gas in the ground in Victoria, but we're not allowed to mine it. That's because the state government says we have a moratorium on gas mining. I think that's a shame, and I think the fact that we aren't using the coal in the ground in the Latrobe Valley is a shame. It will be detrimental to this nation in the long run, and we need to do something about it.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COKER</name>
    <name.id>263547</name.id>
    <electorate>Corangamite</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I would like to begin by thanking the member for Gilmore for moving this important motion to discuss the <inline font-style="italic">Informing regional investment: state of Australia's regions 2024</inline><inline font-style="italic">.</inline> Released by our Albanese government, this report is all about how we can best support our regions to respond to challenges and to harness opportunities. These are opportunities like future jobs growth in the clean energy sector. It's also about supporting regions through natural disasters like the bushfires we've seen in my home state of Victoria over the past week. My thoughts are with all the people who have lost their homes. Many locals in my communities have family and friends in the affected area, so, on their behalf, I extend my heartfelt thanks to our emergency service workers: the firies, the paramedics, the volunteers and the nurses. You are our frontline defenders when natural disaster strikes.</para>
<para>I also urge everyone in my electorate to check your bushfire emergency plans, tidy up your properties and prepare before Wednesday's forecasted heatwave. Let's do the work now to lower the risk of disaster and do our part to make sure emergency services workers aren't stretched beyond their limit.</para>
<para>I am proud to be part of a government that values the service of emergency workers and is committed to ensuring our regions are well prepared for natural disasters. This was noted in the <inline font-style="italic">State </inline><inline font-style="italic">of the regio</inline><inline font-style="italic">ns</inline> report. Facing increasingly likely natural disasters and presented with mounting opportunities for job growth, the Albanese government recognises our regions are in their defining decade. It's why we are supporting them to leverage the economic shifts that come with rapid population growth such as I've seen in my electorate of Corangamite in Victoria. I'm writing hundreds upon hundreds of letters every few months, welcoming to my electorate new members of the community who are ready to join our local workforce. On this point, the report notes that the last couple of years have seen significant population growth across all our regional centres, with many small businesses finding it difficult to meet local workforce demands. Our government is well aware of this challenge and is tackling the issue head on through our fee-free TAFE initiatives, which will see more skilled workers joining the labour market in the coming years.</para>
<para>The report also confirms that our regions are uniquely placed to benefit from the global transition to net zero, but it also acknowledges that the number of clean energy industry jobs will need to increase by about 30 per cent, or about 213,000 workers, by 2033. Through these findings and more, this report demonstrates our government's commitment to restoring leadership to regional policy.</para>
<para>The report also provides a snapshot of the Albanese government's actions to respond to these challenges. Our last two budgets included over 350 packages and individual measures that were all about strengthening regional communities. They are initiatives that place people at the forefront of regional growth. These initiatives include the employment white paper, regional university study hubs, our new migration strategy and, of course, our tax cuts, to be delivered by 1 July, which will make sure that more people in regional Australia can earn more and keep more of what they earn. We will invest $1 billion over three years in our new regional grants programs, which will provide regional livability in our regional towns and cities in partnership with local government and the community.</para>
<para>In closing, we know that success lies in listening to communities and local voices. They know what is best for our regions. We recognise that local solutions should be locally led, and that's an important key message of this report.</para>
<para>Federation Chamber adjourned at 19:23</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
  </fedchamb.xscript>
</hansard>