﻿
<hansard noNamespaceSchemaLocation="../../hansard.xsd" version="2.2">
  <session.header>
    <date>2024-03-21</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="">Thursday, 21 March 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 09:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.</span>
        </p>
      </body>
    </business.start>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>1</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Administrative Review Tribunal Bill 2023</title>
          <page.no>1</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="r7117" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Administrative Review Tribunal Bill 2023</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>1</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The matter before the House is the Administrative Review Tribunal Bill 2023. The question is that the bill be read a second time.</para>
<para> </para>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [09:05] <br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick) </p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>86</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Albanese, A. N.</name>
                  <name>Ananda-Rajah, M.</name>
                  <name>Bandt, A. P.</name>
                  <name>Bates, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Belyea, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Bowen, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Burke, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Burney, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Butler, M. C.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Chalmers, J. E.</name>
                  <name>Chandler-Mather, M.</name>
                  <name>Charlton, A. H. G.</name>
                  <name>Chesters, L. M.</name>
                  <name>Clare, J. D.</name>
                  <name>Claydon, S. C.</name>
                  <name>Coker, E. A.</name>
                  <name>Collins, J. M.</name>
                  <name>Conroy, P. M.</name>
                  <name>Daniel, Z.</name>
                  <name>Doyle, M. J. J.</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Fernando, C.</name>
                  <name>Freelander, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Garland, C. M. L.</name>
                  <name>Gee, A. R.</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                  <name>Giles, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P.</name>
                  <name>Gosling, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                  <name>Hill, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Husic, E. N.</name>
                  <name>Jones, S. P.</name>
                  <name>Kearney, G. M.</name>
                  <name>Keogh, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Khalil, P.</name>
                  <name>King, C. F.</name>
                  <name>King, M. M. H.</name>
                  <name>Lawrence, T. N.</name>
                  <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                  <name>Leigh, A. K.</name>
                  <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                  <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                  <name>McBain, K. L.</name>
                  <name>McBride, E. M.</name>
                  <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, B. K.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, R. G.</name>
                  <name>Mulino, D.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>O'Connor, B. P. J.</name>
                  <name>O'Neil, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Perrett, G. D.</name>
                  <name>Phillips, F. E.</name>
                  <name>Plibersek, T. J.</name>
                  <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                  <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                  <name>Rishworth, A. L.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Rowland, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, M. M.</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Sharkie, R. C. C.</name>
                  <name>Shorten, W. R.</name>
                  <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                  <name>Smith, D. P. B. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z.</name>
                  <name>Swanson, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Thistlethwaite, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Tink, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Vamvakinou, M.</name>
                  <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                  <name>Watts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Wells, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Wilkie, A. D.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, J. H.</name>
                  <name>Zappia, A.</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>52</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Andrews, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Archer, B. K.</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>Caldwell, C. M.</name>
                  <name>Chester, D. J.</name>
                  <name>Coleman, D. B.</name>
                  <name>Conaghan, P. J.</name>
                  <name>Coulton, M. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Entsch, W. G.</name>
                  <name>Fletcher, P. W.</name>
                  <name>Gillespie, D. A.</name>
                  <name>Goodenough, I. R. </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>Joyce, B. T. G.</name>
                  <name>Landry, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Leeser, J.</name>
                  <name>Ley, S. P.</name>
                  <name>Littleproud, D.</name>
                  <name>Marino, N. B.</name>
                  <name>McCormack, M. F.</name>
                  <name>McIntosh, M. I.</name>
                  <name>McKenzie, Z. A.</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, E. L.</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, L. S.</name>
                  <name>Pasin, A.</name>
                  <name>Pearce, G. B.</name>
                  <name>Pike, H. J.</name>
                  <name>Pitt, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Price, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Ramsey, R. E. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Stevens, J.</name>
                  <name>Taylor, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Tehan, D. T.</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>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 agreed to. <br />Bill read a second time.<br />Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced.<br />Ordered that further consideration of the bill be made an order of the day for a later hour this day.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division></subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>COMMITTEES</title>
        <page.no>2</page.no>
        <type>COMMITTEES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Appropriations and Administration Committee</title>
          <page.no>2</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report</title>
            <page.no>2</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On behalf of the Standing Committee on Appropriations and Administration, I present the committee's <inline font-style="italic">Annual </inline><inline font-style="italic">report </inline><inline font-style="italic">2022-23</inline><inline font-style="italic">: </inline><inline font-style="italic">report No. 27</inline>.</para>
<quote><para class="block">Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e).</para></quote>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>2</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Therapeutic Goods and Other Legislation Amendment (Vaping Reforms) Bill 2024</title>
          <page.no>2</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="r7169" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Therapeutic Goods and Other Legislation Amendment (Vaping Reforms) Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>First Reading</title>
            <page.no>2</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>2</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUTLER</name>
    <name.id>HWK</name.id>
    <electorate>Hindmarsh</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a second time.</para></quote>
<para>Today I introduce the Therapeutic Goods and Other Legislation Amendment (Vaping Reforms) Bill 2024.</para>
<para>The bill builds on Labor's long history of pioneering tobacco control reforms, harking back 50 years ago to when the Whitlam government introduced the first restrictions on tobacco advertising. That legacy continued with the introduction of Australia's world-leading tobacco plain-packaging reforms just over 10 years ago, and again with the Albanese government's push to reignite the fight against tobacco, with the Public Health (Tobacco and Other Products) Act 2023, which was passed in the parliament last year.</para>
<para>Tobacco plain packaging was bold policy achieved in the face of some often savage legal and rhetorical assault. It was imaginative policy and it was world-leading policy: twenty-six countries have followed that lead and introduced their own such laws. It's a policy that has saved lives and will continue to save lives. When plain packaging was introduced, around 16 per cent of Australian adults smoked. Today just over 10 per cent do.</para>
<para>But all that progress could be undone if we don't urgently address the threat posed by a new public health menace: vaping.</para>
<para>E-cigarettes and vapes were sold to governments and communities around the world as a therapeutic good—a product that could help hardened smokers, usually people in their 40s or 50s and beyond, to quit smoking and kick the habit.</para>
<para>If vapes are therapeutic goods then it is entirely appropriate that Australia should regulate them as therapeutic goods, instead of allowing them to be sold alongside candy bars in convenience stores, often down the road from schools.</para>
<para>Importantly, this bill does not take away the ability for patients to legitimately access therapeutic vapes to help them quit smoking or manage their nicotine dependence if that is deemed to be clinically appropriate for that patient.</para>
<para>The bill affirms Australia's commitment to its international obligations as a party to the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Under this convention, parties are obliged to develop and implement effective policies to not only prevent and reduce tobacco consumption and exposure but also to prevent and reduce nicotine addiction.</para>
<para>It is critical to introduce new safeguards in accordance with this commitment, to prevent the current and future public health risks associated with vaping.</para>
<para>The bill takes strong action to ban the importation, domestic manufacture, supply, commercial possession and advertisement of vaping goods, except in very limited circumstances. It is a necessary step to address the growing risk posed by vaping in Australia, particularly to youth and young adults, while preserving legitimate patient access to therapeutic vaping goods for smoking cessation and the management of nicotine dependence, where clinically appropriate.</para>
<para>These measures complement changes that have been instituted at the border. Together, these are intended to arrest and reverse the increasing rates of vaping, and to prevent long-term adverse effects on population health.</para>
<para>The reforms in this bill are world leading. Vaping is a very serious public health menace, and the rapid rise in vaping among young people is creating a whole new generation of persons with nicotine dependence in our schools and our broader community. It poses a major threat to population health and Australia's success in tobacco control, and that is why this bill is so critical to addressing these challenges now. The global health community is watching us closely.</para>
<para>The highly addictive nature of nicotine, the sophisticated marketing to vulnerable populations, and the direct inhalation of substances into the lungs mean that risks to population health associated with vaping can be severe. Numerous studies highlight concerns about potential adverse effects, including on adolescent brain development, worsened pregnancy outcomes, cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease and cancer.</para>
<para>This is not surprising, as vapes have been found to include over 200 different chemicals, including listed poisons, heavy metals such as nickel and chromium, and chemical by-products produced during heating such as formaldehyde, nitrosamines, acetone, and acrolein. Some of these chemicals are used in weed killer, nail polish remover and even to embalm dead bodies. A range of other health risks are also associated with vape use, including severe burns, poisoning and seizures.</para>
<para>The evidence is clear: people who have never smoked, and who use vapes, are more likely to take up cigarette smoking than those who do not. And dual use of vaping and tobacco products may result in even worse health outcomes compared to smoking alone.</para>
<para>Perhaps most worryingly, the long-term health risks of vaping are not yet fully known. Nicotine vapes may worsen mental health conditions, and amplify stress, anxiety and depressive symptoms. Parents, teachers and doctors are reporting that nicotine dependence is impacting learning behaviours and wellbeing in schools. In addition, the Australian Dental Association warns that vaping may be setting the next generation up for a raft of oral health issues.</para>
<para>The latest national data show that one in six secondary school students aged 12 to 17 years reported recent vaping in 2022-23—a four-fold increase since the previous survey from 2017. These statistics are alarming and support the need for strong, decisive and urgent action from this parliament.</para>
<para>Vapes are being deliberately marketed and supplied to young Australians, with colours, flavours and packaging specifically designed to attract them. Vaping goods are aggressively promoted by the vaping industry in online advertising and other youth focused media channels. Many vapes are deliberately mislabelled as containing 'no nicotine' or 'zero nicotine' or even unlabelled to avoid detection and seizure. However, the Therapeutic Goods Administration, our TGA, has reported that approximately 90 per cent of all tested vapes are found to contain nicotine, no matter what appears on the label.</para>
<para>Further, we know that a significant number of vape stores around Australia are located within walking distance of our schools—in some states it is as high as nine in 10 stores—and, worryingly, around one in six high school students is now a regular vaper. Allowing these trends to continue is simply not an acceptable option. This is a crisis that deserves our national attention.</para>
<para>The bill appropriately responds by implementing the second stage of the government's vaping reform measures. The first stage commenced earlier this year through amendments to regulations. The importation of disposable single-use vapes, irrespective of nicotine content or therapeutic claims, was banned on 1 January 2024, subject to very limited exceptions. The importation of all other vapes was banned on 1 March 2024, unless certain requirements are met in relation to those vapes, including licences and permits, and premarket notifications under the Therapeutic Goods Act. These reforms focus on turning off the tap at the border as a necessary first step to combat supply.</para>
<para>The second stage, to be effected by this bill, will regulate the importation, domestic manufacture, supply, possession and advertisement of all vapes under the Therapeutic Goods Act. This is achieved by extending the scope of the Therapeutic Goods Act to all vapes, not simply therapeutic vapes.</para>
<para>The bill institutes changes to ban non-therapeutic vapes and ensure that therapeutic vapes are supplied through pharmacy settings alone. Advertisements targeted at young people will also be banned. Disposable vapes will be banned and widespread promotion and availability will be limited.</para>
<para>The bill will be complemented by changes to regulatory settings for therapeutic vapes to increase quality standards, significantly reduce flavours and introduce plain packaging. Similar safeguards already apply to other prescription medicines, including those for smoking cessation and the management of nicotine dependence.</para>
<para>Because let us not be in any doubt: vapes were sold to the Australian community as therapeutic goods, to aid those seeking to quit cigarette smoking. So it is entirely appropriate to regulate them as we do any other therapeutic goods—through regulation that simultaneously ensures legitimate access but provides sound public protection.</para>
<para>The government is not taking away the ability for patients to legitimately access vaping goods for smoking cessation and nicotine dependence, where clinically appropriate. The reforms simply ensure that vapes are only accessed under the clinical supervision of a medical or nurse practitioner, to provide an opportunity for users to receive appropriate advice on the risks associated with vaping, the benefits of not smoking, and any up-to-date health advice as part of their usual care.</para>
<para>Deliberately mislabelling vapes to conceal the presence or content of nicotine will no longer be a means for suppliers to avoid compliance and enforcement. It will be easier for authorities to prove that vapes are unlawful and to enable their seizure. Importantly, there will be no legitimate supply through vape shops, convenience stores or other retail outlets, such as petrol stations or milk bars.</para>
<para>The reforms to strengthen the regulation of all vaping goods irrespective of nicotine content was recommended in the National Tobacco Strategy 2023-2030. The strategy was developed in consultation with a wide range of stakeholders and was endorsed by all Commonwealth, state and territory health ministers in 2023.</para>
<para>The bill provides a single consistent framework that will apply nationally to the regulation of all vapes. The federal cooperative scheme between the Commonwealth, states and territories for the regulation of therapeutic goods will be extended to vaping goods to ensure comprehensive controls. The scheme is achieved through the application of corresponding laws enacted in each state and territory, with Western Australia having recently introduced legislation to their parliament to enact their own corresponding law.</para>
<para>The extension of the Therapeutic Goods Act to vapes is appropriate and necessary in the circumstances and will facilitate a national approach by enabling all jurisdictions to use the same legislation.</para>
<para>Under the bill, there are significant penalties for importing, manufacturing, supplying, possessing and advertising vapes except in certain circumstances. Consistent with the federal cooperative scheme, the Commonwealth will take responsibility for enforcing importation, manufacture, sponsor supply and advertisement. The states and territories will take responsibility for enforcing wholesale supply, retail supply and commercial possession. The Australian Border Force will lead the enforcement at our border.</para>
<para>The Therapeutic Goods Administration and state and territory officers will exercise powers and functions, in concert with police authorities as required, and particularly when organised crime is involved.</para>
<para>Advertising of vapes to the public will be banned in almost all instances. Offences and civil penalties will apply to this conduct and operate in conjunction with bans on advertising in the new tobacco control laws that this parliament passed last year.</para>
<para>Bans on the supply of vapes outside pharmacy settings go to the heart of these reforms and will be principally enforced by the states and territories, with the support of the Commonwealth.</para>
<para>For the first time under the Therapeutic Goods Act, there will be offences and civil penalties for the commercial possession of vapes. These are aimed at unlawful retailers and operators of warehouses and other persons with significant quantities of vapes who deny having been involved in supply. These are tiered offences, with higher maximum penalties depending on the quantities of vapes that have been possessed.</para>
<para>The new ban on possession includes an exception for personal use, including by young Australians who are deliberately being targeted by an industry determined to make a profit. This bill is not about penalising persons who are using vapes, whether they're adults or children.</para>
<para>The focus of the bill is to criminalise the illicit importation, manufacture, supply, advertisement and commercial possession of vapes. This is needed to protect young Australians in particular.</para>
<para>The penalties for breaching the new requirements are significant. These are designed to ensure that the reforms provide a strong deterrence from engaging in conduct that may harm Australians.</para>
<para>The Government knows that some people will say that the reforms will simply grow the black market. However, effective enforcement has been seriously hampered by the current regulatory settings.</para>
<para>The bill will address the methods that certain operators are using to import, advertise and supply nicotine vapes illegally. Strengthening the regulation of all vapes, through enhancing border controls, banning all disposable single use vapes and ending the supply of vapes outside of pharmacy settings, will make it easier for authorities to identify and disrupt the illicit supply of vapes and take enforcement action.</para>
<para>Strengthened enforcement activities across all levels of the supply chain will also combat the black market. To support the implementation and enforcement of these reforms, the Government is providing an additional $25 million to the Australian Border Force and $56.9 million to the TGA over the coming two years. And all states and territories are committed to sharing and increasing compliance action and supporting a national enforcement approach.</para>
<para>The vaping reforms complement a wider set of actions being taken by the government. This includes $63.4 million for new public health information campaigns to prevent and reduce the use of tobacco and e-cigarettes. This includes a dedicated Youth Vaping Education campaign, the first phase of which launched in February, with future phases planned to start later this year; and the National Tobacco and E-Cigarette campaign, which is planned to launch mid-year. These campaigns together will ensure all Australians are aware of the risks associated with vaping, and the supports available to help them quit.</para>
<para>The measures in this bill reflect evidence that a comprehensive range of demand and supply reduction measures can be highly effective in changing drug related attitudes and behaviours. Reforms recommended by the TGA and implemented in 2018 to make codeine a prescription only medicine are one example of this. Evidence showed that, after the codeine reforms were implemented, rates of codeine misuse and sales reduced very substantially.</para>
<para>In the meantime, a range of support services continue to be available nationally to help people quit smoking and the use of e-cigarettes. This includes programs run through state and territory health services and Aboriginal community controlled health services, and the provision of quit advice and support through Quitline counsellors and other health professionals, such as GPs, pharmacists and specialists. It also includes 'first line' smoking cessation products that continue to be available, including medicines and patches that are subsidised on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme.</para>
<para>The government is also providing $29.5 million to expand specialised programs and services to support Australians to quit smoking and vaping, and $141 million to extend and widen the Tackling Indigenous Smoking program to reduce both vaping and smoking among First Nations people.</para>
<para>We must slow and reverse the importation, manufacture, supply and advertisement of vapes in Australia, other than for legitimate, therapeutic use. We know that the job will be difficult, but so much great work is already underway to safeguard the health of Australians from the risks of vaping. The reforms introduced by this bill will further this work and critically empower authorities to stop the spread of vapes that are endangering the health of young Australians.</para>
<para>It is just over 50 years since Labor introduced the first restrictions on tobacco advertising, and just over 10 years since we introduced Australia's world leading plain packaging laws.</para>
<para>As Parliamentarians in this place today, we all have the opportunity and responsibility to act now, to safeguard the health of young Australians for generations to come.</para>
<para>How will history judge us 10 or 50 years from now, if—instead of acting—we equivocate: squandering this opportunity and ignoring our responsibility?</para>
<para>How will our children and grandchildren judge us, then?</para>
<para>Let us lead the world again, once more—for the sake of our children and their children to come.</para>
<para>Finally, I thank the hard-working officials from my department, the Department of Health and Aged Care, officials from the Therapeutic Goods Administration, and the public health sector, who have worked so hard to put together and support us putting together this package of reforms. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Cancer Screening Register Amendment Bill 2024</title>
          <page.no>6</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="r7165" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">National Cancer Screening Register Amendment Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>First Reading</title>
            <page.no>6</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>6</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUTLER</name>
    <name.id>HWK</name.id>
    <electorate>Hindmarsh</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a second time.</para></quote>
<para>The need for this National Cancer Screening Register Amendment Bill 2024 arose from our federal budget last year and the announcement 'Tackling smoking and vaping, and improving cancer outcomes'.</para>
<para>Under this measure, the government announced a $263.8 million investment for a new National Lung Cancer Screening Program commencing in July 2025 to support earlier detection of lung cancer, when treatment is likely to be more effective. Part of this allocation includes expansion of the National Cancer Screening Register to support delivery of the new program.</para>
<para>While advances have been made in the diagnosis, treatment and care of people with lung cancer, it is still the leading cause of cancer-related deaths in this country.</para>
<para>Compared to most other cancers, the survival rate of people with lung cancer is poor. On average, only two in 10 people diagnosed with lung cancer survive five years after diagnosis, compared to a five-year relative survival rate of more than seven in 10 for all cancers combined.</para>
<para>Indigenous Australians are twice as likely to be diagnosed with lung cancer compared to non-Indigenous Australians.</para>
<para>They are also twice as likely to die from lung cancer compared to the general population.</para>
<para>In addition to Indigenous Australians, people living in remote, very remote areas and areas of greatest socioeconomic disadvantage are disproportionately affected by lung cancer, with higher lung cancer incidence and mortality in these populations.</para>
<para>For many people, the impacts of long-term smoking have increased their risk of developing cancer and other health complications. This is why the government is taking action in line with the National Tobacco Strategy 2020-2030 through stronger legislation, enforcement, education and support to prevent the uptake of smoking and vaping, and to encourage people to quit.</para>
<para>The Public Health (Tobacco and Other Products) Act 2023, passed by the parliament last year, consolidated the existing Commonwealth tobacco control framework into one act. It modernised and simplified the existing provisions and allows us to introduce new measures to strengthen our response to smoking and to prevent the promotion of vaping and e-cigarettes. The introduction of reforms to protect Australians, particularly young people, from the emerging harms of vaping and nicotine dependence, is the next step.</para>
<para>At the same time, the government is focused on education and support. The 2023-24 budget included $63 million for public health information campaigns to discourage Australians from taking up vaping and smoking and to encourage more people to quit. A further $30 million was invested in support programs to help Australians quit.</para>
<para>These measures aim to address the significant threat to public health that is caused by cigarettes and vaping. We want to do everything we can to avoid people suffering from preventable lung cancer.</para>
<para>The good news is that, if lung cancer is detected at an earlier stage, it is more likely to be successfully treated, leading to better outcomes for individuals as well as the larger community.</para>
<para>The aim of the National Lung Cancer Screening Program is to reduce the burden of lung cancer in the community—including the incidence of the disease, morbidity from the disease, or mortality from it. The program will facilitate this by detecting lung cancer earlier than would be the case in the absence of screening, thereby improving health outcomes.</para>
<para>The program will target asymptomatic individuals aged 50 to 70 years with a history of cigarette smoking of at least 30 pack-years, and if an individual has a history of cigarette smoking, has quit within the past decade.</para>
<para>Through the program, eligible at-risk Australians will be able to get a lung scan every two years, as recommended by the independent Medical Services Advisory Committee, and follow-up scans if there are any findings.</para>
<para>A positive screening test identifies people who have an increased likelihood of having lung cancer and who require further investigation to determine whether they have the disease. Participants will be encouraged to screen regularly so signs of lung cancer can be detected early.</para>
<para>The new screening program is expected to prevent more than 500 lung cancer deaths every single year.</para>
<para>This bill will amend the National Cancer Screening Register Act 2016, which provides the legislative framework for the operation of the National Cancer Screening Register. Specifically, the bill adds 'lung cancer' to the definition of 'designated cancer' and as a result, expands the scope of our register.</para>
<para>The act established the National Cancer Screening Register as a register of information about screening associated with certain types of cancer for the purpose of supporting cancer screening programs. The register commenced operation in 2017.</para>
<para>The act was drafted in such a way that new cancer screening programs could be added to the scope of the register in the future through amendments to the definition of 'designated cancer'.</para>
<para>Currently, the designated cancers in the act are bowel cancer and cervical cancer to allow the register to support the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program and the National Cervical Screening Program.</para>
<para>Inclusion of lung cancer as a 'designated cancer' in the act will make the National Lung Cancer Screening Program the third cancer screening program delivered by the register.</para>
<para>The government recognises the opportunity to leverage the register to facilitate a national approach to lung cancer screening. Expansion of the scope of the register to the new program will enable a consolidated source of lung cancer screening information to be maintained and to be used to support the screening program.</para>
<para>The bill will provide the legislative basis for the register to deliver the program, including handling of program participants' personal and sensitive information in connection with lung cancer screening and diagnosis.</para>
<para>The bill will effectively expand the register's purposes that are already in place for the bowel and cervical screening programs to the new National Lung Cancer Screening Program.</para>
<para>For example, to support continuity of care the register will generate advice and screening reminders for program participants and their nominated healthcare provider about when an individual is due to undergo a lung scan. If required, reminders will prompt an individual to see their healthcare provider following a lung scan. Depending on the participant's risk profile, the provider may refer the participant for a follow-up lung scan.</para>
<para>The register will support healthcare providers by providing them access to patients' lung cancer screening information, for the purpose of providing healthcare.</para>
<para>Program participants will have access to their own lung cancer screening information in the register and be able to update their participation in the program, such as deferring their screening or opting out of the register.</para>
<para>As a repository of information about lung cancer screening and diagnoses, the register will support monitoring of the effectiveness, quality and safety of lung cancer screening to improve service delivery of the program.</para>
<para>There are other efficiencies that can be gained by building on the current functions of the register to support lung cancer screening. For example, the register already interoperates with GP clinical information systems to enable healthcare providers to provide data to the register, as well as access to screening information in the register to better inform clinical decision-making.</para>
<para>Importantly, adding lung cancer as a designated cancer will extend the limited authorisations and exceptions in the act to ensure that personal information is only collected, recorded, used or disclosed to or from the register for specific purposes.</para>
<para>It should be noted that, apart from these legislative protections and restrictions, the register operator is required to operate the register in accordance with strict security requirements. Through this bill, the existing identity and user access management solutions and security protocols will be expanded to lung cancer screening information that's held in the register.</para>
<para>The government is serious about increasing the number of Australians who participate in cancer screening as part of the national fight against cancer.</para>
<para>The National Lung Cancer Screening Program, in particular, is being designed to underpin the principles of access and equity. That is why a key element of the program includes two new Medicare Benefits Schedule items for lung cancer screening which will be available from July 2025 to enable scans to be delivered at no out-of-pocket cost to patients.</para>
<para>The National Lung Cancer Screening Program is being co-designed with and for First Nations people to ensure the program is culturally safe and appropriate, and mobile screening and patient travel support measures are in development to increase access to the program—including to support Australians in rural and remote locations with limited access to these services.</para>
<para>Other key activities underway to support the program include development of program guidelines, workforce education and training materials, a quality management framework and a national communications strategy.</para>
<para>While the program will impact our health system, it is not anticipated to increase the patient pool, but rather to reduce the current impact of treating advanced stage cancer patients and palliative care patients. The Department of Health and Aged Care continues to work with states and territories on implementation of the program.</para>
<para>Passage of this bill in the winter sitting will enable sufficient time to scale up the register, to undertake consultation with healthcare providers, build additional clinical software interface and deploy the register to support the National Lung Cancer Screening Program from July 2025.</para>
<para>I commend the bill to the House.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>COMMITTEES</title>
        <page.no>8</page.no>
        <type>COMMITTEES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Public Works Joint Committee</title>
          <page.no>8</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Approval of Work</title>
            <page.no>8</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr LEIGH</name>
    <name.id>BU8</name.id>
    <electorate>Fenner</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That, in accordance with the provisions of the <inline font-style="italic">Public Works Committee Act 1969</inline>, it is expedient to carry out the following proposed work which was referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works and on which the committee has duly reported to Parliament: Airservices Australia—PFAS Remediation of Former Fire Training Ground at Launceston Airport, Tasmania.</para></quote>
<para>Airservices Australia is proposing to undertake remediation works at the former firefighting ground at Launceston Airport, Tasmania, to remove and manage per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, PFAS, contamination in the soil and associated infrastructure. The cost of the proposed work is estimated at $24.1 million, GST exclusive.</para>
<para>The proposed works were referred to the public works committee on 14 November 2023. Following its inquiry, the committee has recommended that the House of Representatives resolve, pursuant to section 18(7) of the Public Works Committee Act 1969, that it is expedient to carry out the works. Subject to parliamentary approval, the works are expected to commence as soon as possible and to be completed by August 2024.</para>
<para>On behalf of the government, I would like to thank the committee, ably chaired by the member for Moreton, for undertaking a timely inquiry. I commend the motion to the House.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Law Enforcement Joint Committee</title>
          <page.no>8</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report</title>
            <page.no>8</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MILLER-FROST</name>
    <name.id>296272</name.id>
    <electorate>Boothby</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On behalf of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Law Enforcement, I present the committee's report on the committee visit to the Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation.</para>
<para>Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e).</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MILLER-FROST</name>
    <name.id>296272</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I rise to speak about the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Law Enforcement's report on its visit to the Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation, in Brisbane. The committee became familiar with the important work of the centre, known as the ACCCE, in the course of its inquiry into law enforcement capabilities in relation to child exploitation. The committee reported on that inquiry in November 2023, with a thorough body of evidence, and made 15 recommendations, and I'm pleased to draw the attention of the House to that earlier report.</para>
<para>As part of the committee's ongoing concern about this issue, it was able to recently visit the ACCCE, in Brisbane, speak with its officers and learn more about the work in person. The committee met with staff from several ACCCE work areas, including the Victim Identification Unit, the Intelligence Fusion Cell and the Online Child Safety Team. It was a beneficial opportunity for committee members to ask questions about these officers' diverse and extensive work. For example, the Victim Identification Unit discussed its efforts to identify possible victims and offenders from seemingly unidentifiable indicators. The Online Child Safety Team explained some of the strategies that it employs to inform the community about the serious risks of child exploitation occurring online.</para>
<para>The committee was particularly interested in the welfare of officers involved in what can be harrowing work. We were impressed with the level of support provided to ensure the ongoing mental health of officers, and the commitment the officers had to their very valuable work, literally saving children.</para>
<para>The centre receives around 50,000 referrals a year, many from the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, NCMEC, in the United States, and overseas sources. But it also receives referrals and information from the general public here in Australia. Each of those referrals is valuable. Some of the referrals they receive have very limited information, but thanks to the excellent work in the centre, we heard of some case studies where, based on a single image with no identifying information, they were able to identify the child and rescue them and identify the perpetrator and refer them for prosecution. While we heard of some very fast turnarounds between referral and arrest, a matter of days, we were also informed that no case is ever too cold to be reviewed. Cases remain open until they are solved, even if that takes, sadly, a decade or more.</para>
<para>Importantly, this centre also works on prevention, community education and awareness raising. They showed us some children's books they have developed to educate children and their parents about the safe use of social media and gaming platforms, and the difference between a friend you know and an online friend. The book, called <inline font-style="italic">Jack </inline><inline font-style="italic">changes the game</inline>, is available via the centre's website, and I encourage parents, grandparents and teachers to look at it.</para>
<para>I thank the ACCCE for hosting us and for briefing the committee on its important work. Child exploitation is a terrible scourge on society, but Australians can have confidence in the tireless work of the ACCCE to disrupt and deter offenders who are seeking to harm children. I commend the committee's report to the House.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REPACHOLI</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I wish to make a short statement on the Joint Committee on Law Enforcement's report entitled <inline font-style="italic">Report on committee visit to the Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation</inline>. Last month I joined my colleagues, committee chair Senator Helen Polley, deputy chair the member for Wide Bay, the member for Boothby and Senator David Shoebridge when we visited the Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation in Brisbane.</para>
<para>The centre is a world-class collaborative hub where law enforcement, both public and private sectors, and civil society are brought together. By having all these different sections of society in one place, the centre can co-ordinate national projects that deter, disrupt and prevent child exploitation, with a specific focus on countering online child sexual exploitation. We met and spoke directly to staff from several work areas in the centre. We heard firsthand moving examples of how the centre has been directly involved in interventions where children have been rescued from abuse. We learnt about the challenges and opportunities officers face when countering these terrible crimes.</para>
<para>I would like to commend the specialised psychological support that is made available to officers that work in the centre. It was clear to us that supporting staff wellbeing is very important at the centre. During our visit we received a tour of the building and learnt how it is specifically designed to support the wellbeing of the staff there.</para>
<para>We applaud the extremely important and valuable work that is being done at the Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation. We were highly impressed with the dedication of the officers who work there. It was not lost on us that these officers work in a highly confronting role. Officers can be required to review horrendous child abuse material to identify victims or investigate offenders. Our visit to the centre motivates the committee to continue to draw attention to our November 2023 report into law enforcement capabilities in relation to child exploitation. To fight these terrible crimes, which harm children both here at home in Australia and overseas, it is vital that law enforcement has the capabilities it needs in order to counter child exploitation.</para>
<para>The officers at the centre perform difficult tasks in service to our community to help protect children. We left the centre with a great sense of respect and admiration for these officers. I would like to thank the secretariat of the committee for arranging a visit for us. I would also like to extend our thanks to law enforcement officers around the nation who work on countering child exploitation, whether that be at the Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation or elsewhere. Thank you for the work you do.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Intelligence and Security Joint Committee</title>
          <page.no>9</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report</title>
            <page.no>9</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KHALIL</name>
    <name.id>101351</name.id>
    <electorate>Wills</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On behalf of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, I present the following reports: <inline font-style="italic">Advisory report on the amendments made by the Australian Citizenship Amendment (Citizenship Repudiation) Bill 2023</inline><inline font-style="italic">, a</inline><inline font-style="italic">lso reporting on review of </inline><inline font-style="italic">s</inline><inline font-style="italic">ubdivision C of </inline><inline font-style="italic">d</inline><inline font-style="italic">ivision </inline><inline font-style="italic">3</inline><inline font-style="italic"> of </inline><inline font-style="italic">p</inline><inline font-style="italic">art </inline><inline font-style="italic">2</inline><inline font-style="italic"> of the Australian Citizenship Act 2007 (</inline><inline font-style="italic">citizenship cessation determinations</inline><inline font-style="italic">)</inline> and <inline font-style="italic">A</inline><inline font-style="italic">dvisory report on the National Security Legislation Amendment (Comprehensive Review and Other Measures No. 3) Bill 2023</inline>.</para>
<para>Reports made parliamentary papers in accordance with standing order 39(e).</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KHALIL</name>
    <name.id>101351</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—On behalf of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, it gives me great pleasure to present the committee's advisory report on the amendments made by the Australian Citizenship Amendment (Citizenship Repudiation) Bill 2023. This report also incorporates, as noted, a review of subdivision C of division 3 of part 2 of the Australian Citizenship Act 2007 (citizenship cessation determinations) as required by the Intelligence Services Act 2001 as well as certain amendments circulated in the Senate.</para>
<para>The Australian Citizenship Amendment (Citizenship Repudiation) Act 2023 amended the Citizenship Act to repeal the invalid provisions and establish a revised citizenship cessation regime. Under the new regime the minister can make an application to request that a court exercise its power to make an order to cease a dual citizen's Australian citizenship, where the person has been convicted of a serious offence or offences.</para>
<para>The act passed into law on 8 December 2023, and at the time of this report the provisions for a court to impose citizenship cessation as part of a sentence for certain offences has not yet been used.</para>
<para>The committee's unanimous report supported the passage of the act on the basis that, with the power to cease citizenship sitting with a court, such measures will only be taken in exceptional circumstances.</para>
<para>The constitutionality of citizenship cessation laws is, given the decisions in the Alexander and Benbrika cases, of utmost importance. The committee is satisfied that the act has addressed the primary grounds under which previous provisions regarding citizenship cessation have been found to be unconstitutional.</para>
<para>Although the committee considers the safeguards in the act for children as generally robust it has recommended that future consideration of amendments should consider if the scheme should continue to operate in relation to persons above 14 and below 18 only in exceptional circumstances and of any practice issues that may arise about a person's ability to exercise the rights connected to their citizenship of another country.</para>
<para>Finally, the committee notes that section 51B of the Citizenship Act now provides that, as soon as practicable after each 12-month period from the commencement of the provisions, the minister must table a report in each house of the parliament that sets out the number of applications made under new section 36D. The committee would appreciate this report being provided to the committee with a view to it seeking further written or oral briefings on the use of the citizenship cessation powers if it considers it necessary.</para>
<para>On behalf of the committee, I extend my thanks to those who participated in the inquiry by providing submissions and appearing at public hearings, and of course all of the work of the deputy chair, my fellow committee members and the secretariat.</para>
<para>I commend this report to the House.</para>
<para>On behalf of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, it also gives me great pleasure to present the Committee's report on the inquiry into the National Security Legislation Amendment (Comprehensive Review and Other Measures No. 3) Bill 2023—known as NSLAB.</para>
<para>The committee supports the measures contained in the bill which would implement 12 recommendations of the 2020 Comprehensive Review of the Legal Framework of the National Intelligence Community conducted by Mr Dennis Richardson. In particular, the measures contained in the bill will support Australia's national security agencies by strengthening identity protections for their employees, increasing operational flexibility and information sharing, clarifying some authorities and approvals processes to provide greater certainty, and supporting quicker processing of security clearance suitability assessments.</para>
<para>The committee's report recommended that the bill be passed, subject to several recommendations relating to notification of delayed security assessments, cover employment arrangements used by the Australian Signals Directorate and the consolidation and modernisation of secrecy offences.</para>
<para>The committee appreciates the work ASIO does in providing assurance across state and federal government through its security assessments and its new security clearance functions. But at the same time the committee acknowledges that delays in furnishing these assessments have the potential to greatly impact an individual, their livelihood and their career. As such, the committee agrees that additional scrutiny should be applied to determine the reasons for delays greater than 12 months and recommends that, following the entry into effect of the new notification provisions in the bill, ASIO include in its annual report all instances where it has notified the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security about such delays. The government should also closely review all forms, guidance materials and other related documentation provided to individuals undergoing the clearance process to ensure the applicants are made aware of their right to make a complaint to the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security from the outset of that process.</para>
<para>The committee also recommended that, in respect of the inclusion of the Australian Signals Directorate in the new cover employment provisions alongside ASIO and ASIS, the explanatory memorandum to this bill be amended to include details of why this amendment is necessary for ASD, the Australian Signals Directorate. The explanatory memorandum should also remove the misleading reference to recommendation 70 of the comprehensive review in relation to ASD, when ASD was not mentioned by Mr Richardson in his recommendation. The committee also requests that ASD inform the committee about the implementation of its cover employment arrangements as part of the committee's annual review of its administration and expenditure.</para>
<para>Additionally, the committee carefully considered evidence regarding the consolidation of secrecy offences in the Intelligence Services Act 2001 and the modernisation of the publication offences in the ASIO Act. The committee agrees that these changes are necessary, justified and proportionate but recommends that careful consideration should be given to the findings of the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor's review into secrecy offence legislation once his report is released later this year.</para>
<para>The careful implementation of the comprehensive review's recommendations is making a tangible difference in enhancing the efficacy and strength of Australia's national security legislative architecture.</para>
<para>The committee acknowledges that the amendments put forward in the bill form only part of the implementation of many recommendations from the comprehensive review. The committee notes that the implementation of remaining recommendations is currently under consideration by the responsible departments, and the committee looks forward to the opportunity to consider further advice and action in this regard in due course.</para>
<para>On behalf of the committee, I extend my thanks to those who participated in the inquiry by providing submissions. My thanks to the deputy chair and fellow members and to the secretariat for their hard work and quality work. The secretariat have been making a great effort given the amount and intensity of reports that we have been tabling in this place. There is a lot of work that goes on behind the scenes, and I do want to mark my gratitude to the members of the secretariat, some of whom are here today, for their fine work under extreme pressure. Well done and thank you.</para>
<para>I commend this report to the House.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>11</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Administrative Review Tribunal Bill 2023</title>
          <page.no>11</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="r7117" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Administrative Review Tribunal Bill 2023</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Consideration in Detail</title>
            <page.no>11</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present two supplementary explanatory memoranda to the bill, and I seek leave to move government amendments (1) to (7) on sheet SE106 and government amendments (1) to (109) on sheet ZC275, as circulated, together.</para>
<para>Leave granted.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I move government amendments (1) to (7) on sheet SE106 and government amendments (1) to (109) on sheet ZC275 together:</para>
<quote><para class="block">SHEET SE106</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Clause 4, page 4 (line 15) to page 14 (line 11), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">ART social services decision</inline>: see subsection 131D(3).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">eligible social services decision</inline>: see section 131C.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">second review</inline>: see subsection 131D(1).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Clause 108, page 89 (line 16), omit "Note", substitute "Note 1".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Clause 108, page 89 (after line 18), at the end of subclause (3), add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note 2: This subsection does not apply in relation to ART social services decisions (see Part 5A).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) Clause 111, page 92 (after line 17), after paragraph (2)(c), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ca) if the party has a right to apply for second review of the Tribunal's decision under Part 5A—notice of that right;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) Page 108 (after line 16), after Part 5, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Part 5A — Second review for certain social services decisions</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Division 1 — Preliminary</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">131A Simplified outline of this Part</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">A person may apply to the Tribunal for review of an ART social services decision.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Most ART social services decisions are decisions made by the Tribunal on review of social services decisions. However, some ART social services decisions are made originally by the Tribunal.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">In general, the Tribunal must deal with an application for review of an ART social services decision in the same way as it would deal with a reviewable decision of that kind.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">However, this general rule is modified by Division 3 of this Part, and may also be modified by regulations made under this Part.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">An application cannot be made under section 123 to refer a decision of the Tribunal on review of a social services decision, or a decision of the Tribunal on second review, to the guidance and appeals panel.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">131B How this Part applies</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">This Part applies despite subsection 108(3) (no application for review of varied or substituted decision).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">131C Meaning of <inline font-style="italic">eligible</inline> <inline font-style="italic">social services decision</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Each of the following is an <inline font-style="italic">eligible</inline><inline font-style="italic">social services decision</inline>:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) a reviewable decision made under the <inline font-style="italic">A New Tax System (Family Assistance) Act 1999</inline>;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) a reviewable decision made under the <inline font-style="italic">A New Tax System (Family Assistance) (Administration) Act 1999</inline>, other than a child care provider decision (within the meaning of that Act);</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) a decision under section 92 of the <inline font-style="italic">Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988</inline> to refuse an extension application;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) a reviewable decision made under the <inline font-style="italic">Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988</inline> that is a care percentage decision (within the meaning of that Act);</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) a decision under subsection 95N(2) of the <inline font-style="italic">Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988</inline> to make, or not to make, a determination;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(f) a reviewable decision made under the <inline font-style="italic">Paid Parental Leave Act 2010</inline> that is a claimant decision (within the meaning of that Act);</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(g) a reviewable decision made under the <inline font-style="italic">Social Security Act 1991</inline>;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(h) a reviewable decision made under the <inline font-style="italic">Social Security (Administration) Act 1999</inline>;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) a reviewable decision made under the <inline font-style="italic">Student Assistance Act 1973</inline>.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Division 2 — General rules for second review</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">131D Who can apply</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) A person whose interests are affected by an ART social services decision may apply to the Tribunal for review (the <inline font-style="italic">second review</inline>) of the decision.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) However, an application cannot be made for second review if the ART social services decision was made in accordance with subsection 103(2) (decision agreed by parties).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) An <inline font-style="italic">ART social services decision</inline> is:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) for an eligible social services decision that has been affirmed by the Tribunal—the decision as affirmed; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) for an eligible social services decision that has been varied by the Tribunal—the decision as varied; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) for an eligible social services decision that has been set aside and remade by the Tribunal—the decision as remade; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) for an eligible social services decision that has been set aside and remitted to the decision-maker by the Tribunal—the decision as set aside; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) for an eligible social services decision made under section 92 or subsection 95N(2) of the <inline font-style="italic">Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988</inline>—the decision as made.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">131E Operation of this Act and other laws</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) This Act applies in relation to an ART social services decision as if the decision were a reviewable decision.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) If the review of an eligible social services decision under this Act was subject to provisions with a contrary intention in another Act, any second review relating to the decision is subject to those provisions in the same way.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) This section has effect subject to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the modifications set out in Division 3; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) any modifications of this Act prescribed by the regulations for the purposes of second review.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Division 3 — Modifications for second review</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">131F References to the decision-maker</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">A reference in this Act, as it would apply for the purposes of second review, to the decision-maker for an ART social services decision is taken to be a reference to the decision-maker for the related eligible social services decision.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">131G Giving reasons and documents to Tribunal</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Section 23 (decision-maker must give reasons and documents to Tribunal—general rule) does not apply in relation to an application for second review.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">131H Who can apply — claimant decisions</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Despite section 17 (who can apply), an application for second review in relation to a claimant decision (within the meaning of the <inline font-style="italic">Paid Parental Leave Act 2010</inline>) may not be made by a person in the person's capacity as an employer.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">131J When to apply</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Despite a contrary intention in any other law, an application for second review must be made within the time prescribed under section 18 (when to apply—general rule).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) However, an application for second review of a child care decision (within the meaning of the <inline font-style="italic">A New Tax System (Family Assistance) (Administration) Act 1999</inline>) about an individual's entitlement to be paid CCS for a week may also be made after the time prescribed under section 18 (when to apply—general rule) if the application is made:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) because of a review, by the Commissioner of Taxation, of a previous decision by the Commissioner about the taxable income of the individual or another person in relation to whom the individual has met the CCS reconciliation conditions for the income year in which the CCS fortnight that includes the week starts; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) within the time prescribed under that section after the individual or other person was notified by the Commissioner of the outcome of the review.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">131K Parties to proceeding</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) The parties to a proceeding for second review include the persons who were parties to the proceeding for review of the related eligible social services decision.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) However, subsection (1) has effect subject to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) section 65 (certain parties may seek to withdraw from being a party); and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) section 83 (Tribunal may remove party from proceeding if party fails to appear or does not comply).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">131L Limits on applying to become a party to proceeding — claimant decisions</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) This section applies to a proceeding for a second review that relates to a claimant decision (within the meaning of the <inline font-style="italic">Paid Parental Leave Act 2010</inline>).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Despite paragraph 22(1)(c), a person may not apply to be a party to the proceeding in the person's capacity as an employer.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">131M Decision cannot be altered outside Tribunal process</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Despite a contrary intention in any other law, section 31 (decision cannot be altered outside Tribunal process) has effect in relation to a second review.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">131N No automatic election notice for decision-maker</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Despite a contrary intention in any other law, a decision-maker is not taken to have given the Tribunal an election notice in relation to a second review.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">131P Tribunal may have regard to records and documents from earlier proceeding</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">In a proceeding for second review, the Tribunal may have regard to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) any record of the proceeding (the <inline font-style="italic">earlier proceeding</inline>) in which the ART social services decision was made (including a record of any evidence taken in the earlier proceeding); and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) any document or thing relating to the earlier proceeding given to the Tribunal; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) any order or recommendation of the Tribunal in the earlier proceeding.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">131Q Care percentage determinations reviewed under other Acts</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Family assistance care percentage decisions</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Section 123 of the <inline font-style="italic">A New Tax System (Family Assistance) (Administration) Act 1999</inline> does not apply in relation to a second review of a family assistance care percentage decision.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) If:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the Tribunal has reviewed an ART social services decision made on review of a decision on application referred to in section 89 of the <inline font-style="italic">Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988</inline>; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the review of the ART social services decision involved (wholly or partly) a review of a determination to which a family assistance care percentage decision relates;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">then, despite section 54 of this Act, the Tribunal must not, on second review of the family assistance care percentage decision, vary or substitute the decision in a way that would have the effect of varying or substituting the determination referred to in paragraph (b).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Child support care percentage decisions</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Section 95M of the <inline font-style="italic">Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988</inline> does not apply in relation to a second review of a child support care percentage decision.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) If:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the Tribunal has reviewed an ART social services decision made on review of a decision on application referred to in section 111 of the <inline font-style="italic">A New Tax System (Family Assistance) (Administration) Act 1999</inline>; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the review of the ART social services decision involved (wholly or partly) a review of a determination to which a child support care percentage decision relates;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">then, despite section 54 of this Act, the ART must not, on second review of the child support care percentage decision, vary or substitute the decision in a way that would have the effect of varying or substituting the determination referred to in paragraph (b).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Definitions</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) In this section:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">child support care percentage decision</inline> means a care percentage decision within the meaning of the <inline font-style="italic">Child Support </inline><inline font-style="italic">(Registration and Collection) Act 1988</inline>.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">family assistance care percentage decision</inline> means a care percentage decision within the meaning of the <inline font-style="italic">A New Tax System (Family Assistance) (Administration) Act 1999</inline>.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">131R Date of effect provisions</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The following provisions do not apply in relation to second review:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) section 125 of the <inline font-style="italic">A New Tax System (Family Assistance) (Administration) Act 1999</inline>;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) section 95N of the <inline font-style="italic">Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988</inline>.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">131S Treating events as having occurred</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Paragraph 127(a) of the <inline font-style="italic">A New Tax System (Family Assistance) (Administration) Act 1999</inline> has effect as if the reference in that paragraph to ART review of a decision included a reference to second review of an ART social services decision made on ART review.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Paragraph 183(a) of the <inline font-style="italic">Social Security (Administration) Act 1999</inline> has effect as if the reference in that paragraph to ART review of a decision included a reference to second review of an ART social services decision made on ART review.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Paragraph 319(a) of the <inline font-style="italic">Student Assistance Act 1973</inline> has effect as if the reference in that paragraph to ART review of a decision included a reference to second review of an ART social services decision made on ART review.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">131T Remitting decisions for reconsideration</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Despite a contrary intention in any other law, section 85 (Tribunal may remit decision to decision-maker for reconsideration) applies in relation to a second review.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">131U Legal or financial assistance</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Despite a contrary intention in any other law (other than section 122 of the <inline font-style="italic">A New Tax System (Family Assistance) (Administration) Act 1999</inline>):</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) subsection 294(1) (legal or financial assistance for applicants) applies in relation to a person who applies, or proposes to apply, to the Tribunal for second review; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) subsection 294(3) (legal or financial assistance for other parties) applies in relation to a proceeding for second review; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) subsection 294(4) (legal or financial assistance for court proceedings) applies in relation to a matter that relates to a proceeding for second review.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">131V Operation and implementation of decision on second review</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Despite a contrary intention in any other law, subsection 32(2) (Tribunal may stay operation or implementation) applies in relation to a second review.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">131W Guidance and appeals panel</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">An application cannot be made under section 123 to refer any of the following to the guidance and appeals panel:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) a decision of the Tribunal on review of an eligible social services decision;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) a decision of the Tribunal on second review.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note: However, the President may, on the President's own initiative, refer an application for review of an eligible social services decision or for second review to the guidance and appeals panel under section 122.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">131X Time and manner for making appeals</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) This section applies:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) if a person applies for second review of an ART social services decision; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) for the purposes of counting the 28 days mentioned in paragraph 174(1)(a), (b) or (c) within which an appeal to the Federal Court from the decision may be made.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Do not take into account any day in the period between:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the day the application for second review is made; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the day the person is given:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) notice under subsection 37(5) that the Tribunal has been constituted for the purposes of the second review; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) notice of a decision by the Tribunal that the person's interests are not affected by the ART social services decision.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) Clause 172, page 143 (line 8), after "Registrar", insert ", or second review that relates to the decision,".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(7) Clause 172, page 143 (line 10), after "<inline font-style="italic">1988</inline>", insert "and section 131E of this Act".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">SHEET ZC275</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Clause 4, page 9 (lines 16 to 18), omit the definition of <inline font-style="italic">litigation guardian</inline>.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Clause 4, page 9 (before line 19), before the definition of <inline font-style="italic">made under an Act</inline>, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">litigation supporter</inline>, in relation to a party to a proceeding, means a person appointed to be a litigation supporter for the party under section 67.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Clause 4, page 10 (line 12), omit "subsection", substitute "section".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) Clause 29, page 29 (line 22), omit "the decision-maker", substitute "a person".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) Clause 29, page 29 (line 25), omit "decision-maker", substitute "person".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) Clause 29, page 29 (lines 27 to 29), omit paragraph (3)(c), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the person gives a copy of the application for the order to each party to the proceeding for review of the decision (other than the person);</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(7) Clause 37, page 38 (line 21), after "non-participating party", insert "to the proceeding".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(8) Clause 42, page 42 (lines 12 to 15), omit subclause (5), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) If the Tribunal is constituted for the purposes of the proceeding by 2 or 3 members, the presiding member must be:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) if a Non-Judicial Deputy President constituted, or was one of the persons who constituted, the Tribunal for the purposes of the proceeding in which the Tribunal decision was made—equal in seniority to, or more senior than, the most senior person involved in making the Tribunal decision (see subsections (6) and (7)); or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) in any other case—more senior than the most senior person involved in making the Tribunal decision (see subsections (6) and (7)).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(9) Clause 55, page 47 (after line 16), after subclause (2), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2A) If a party to the proceeding is a non-participating party to a Tribunal case event in relation to the proceeding, subsection (1) does not apply in relation to that party in relation to that Tribunal case event.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(10) Clause 56, page 48 (line 15), after "to a proceeding", insert "or a Tribunal case event in relation to a proceeding".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(11) Heading to clause 60, page 50 (line 11), at the end of the heading, add "or Tribunal case event".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(12) Clause 60, page 50 (lines 12 to 14), omit subclause (1), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) A person who is the decision-maker for a reviewable decision may give the Tribunal written notice (an <inline font-style="italic">election notice</inline>) that the person does not wish to participate in:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) a kind of proceeding in the Tribunal; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) a kind of Tribunal case event (other than a directions hearing or part of a directions hearing) in relation to a kind of proceeding in the Tribunal.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(13) Clause 60, page 50 (line 16), after "proceeding", insert "or Tribunal case event".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(14) Heading to clause 61, page 50 (line 19), at the end of the heading, add "or Tribunal case event".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(15) Clause 61, page 50 (line 27), after "notice", insert "under paragraph 60(1)(a)".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(16) Clause 61, page 51 (lines 3 to 7), omit the note.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(17) Clause 61, page 51 (after line 7), after subclause (1), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1A) A person is a <inline font-style="italic">non-participating party</inline> to a Tribunal case event in relation to a proceeding if:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the person is a party to the proceeding (other than the applicant); and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the proceeding relates to a decision for which the person is the decision-maker; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the Tribunal case event and proceeding are of a kind for which the person has given an election notice under paragraph 60(1)(b); and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) the proceeding is not a guidance and appeals panel proceeding; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) any conditions prescribed by the rules for the purposes of this paragraph are satisfied; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(f) the Tribunal has not decided under section 62 that the person is to participate in the Tribunal case event; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(g) the Tribunal has not ordered the person to participate in the Tribunal case event under section 63.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note: A non-participating party remains a party to the proceeding and still needs to comply with this Act and orders of the Tribunal in relation to the proceeding. However, certain requirements do not apply to the party (see, for example, section 83 which deals with removal of a party for failure to appear or non-compliance).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(18) Clause 61, page 51 (line 9), after "proceeding", insert "or Tribunal case event".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(19) Clause 61, page 51 (line 10), after "proceeding", insert "or Tribunal case event".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(20) Clause 61, page 51 (line 11), after "proceeding", insert "or Tribunal case event".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(21) Clause 61, page 51 (line 14), after "proceeding", insert "or Tribunal case event".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(22) Clause 62, page 51 (after line 23), after subclause (1), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1A) If a non-participating party to a Tribunal case event gives the Tribunal written notice (a <inline font-style="italic">participation notice</inline>) that the party wishes to participate in the Tribunal case event, the Tribunal must decide whether or not the party is to participate in the Tribunal case event.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note: An election notice relates to a kind of Tribunal case event in relation to a kind of proceeding. A participation notice relates to a particular Tribunal case event of that kind. The election notice continues to apply to other Tribunal case events of that kind in relation to proceedings of that kind.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(23) Clause 63, page 51 (after line 29), after subclause (1), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1A) A non-participating party to a Tribunal case event may give the Tribunal written submissions in relation to the Tribunal case event.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(24) Clause 63, page 52 (line 3), after "proceeding", insert "or Tribunal case event in relation to a proceeding".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(25) Clause 64, page 52 (line 17), at the end of paragraph (1)(b), add "or Tribunal case events".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(26) Clause 64, page 52 (line 24), at the end of paragraph (2)(c), add "or a Tribunal case event in relation to the proceeding".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(27) Heading to clause 67, page 54 (line 1), omit "litigation guardian", substitute "litigation supporter".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(28) Heading to subclause 67(1), page 54 (line 2), omit "<inline font-style="italic">litigation guardian</inline>", substitute "<inline font-style="italic">litigation supporter</inline>".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(29) Clause 67, page 54 (lines 3 and 4), omit "litigation guardian", substitute "litigation supporter".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(30) Clause 67, page 54 (lines 6 to 11), omit paragraph (1)(a), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the party does not have decision-making ability; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(31) Clause 67, page 54 (after line 14), after subclause (1), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1A) In considering whether to make an order under subsection (1), it is to be presumed that a party to a proceeding has decision-making ability.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1B) The presumption is not rebutted solely on the basis that a party has a disability.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(32) Clause 67, page 54 (line 15), omit "litigation guardian", substitute "litigation supporter".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(33) Clause 67, page 54 (line 20), omit "litigation guardian", substitute "litigation supporter".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(34) Clause 67, page 54 (lines 21 and 22), omit "litigation guardian", substitute "litigation supporter".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(35) Clause 67, page 54 (line 26), omit "litigation guardian", substitute "litigation supporter".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(36) Clause 67, page 55 (line 3), omit "litigation guardian", substitute "litigation supporter".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(37) Heading to subclause 67(5), page 55 (line 6), omit "<inline font-style="italic">litigation guardian</inline>", substitute "<inline font-style="italic">litigation supporter</inline>".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(38) Clause 67, page 55 (line 7), omit "litigation guardian", substitute "litigation supporter".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(39) Clause 67, page 55 (lines 8 and 9), omit paragraph (5)(a), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the party may participate in the proceeding:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) wherever possible—with the support of the litigation supporter; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) otherwise—by the litigation supporter; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(40) Clause 67, page 55 (line 10), omit "litigation guardian", substitute "litigation supporter".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(41) Clause 67, page 55 (line 13), omit "litigation guardian", substitute "litigation supporter".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(42) Heading to subclause 67(6), page 55 (line 16), omit "<inline font-style="italic">litigation guardian</inline>", substitute "<inline font-style="italic">litigation supporter</inline>".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(43) Clause 67, page 55 (line 17), omit "litigation guardian", substitute "litigation supporter".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(44) Clause 67, page 55 (line 18), omit "litigation guardian", substitute "litigation supporter".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(45) Clause 67, page 55 (line 22), omit "litigation guardian", substitute "litigation supporter".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(46) Clause 67, page 55 (line 26), omit "litigation guardian", substitute "litigation supporter".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(47) Heading to subclause 67(9), page 55 (line 28), omit "<inline font-style="italic">litigation guardian</inline>", substitute "<inline font-style="italic">litigation supporter</inline>".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(48) Clause 67, page 55 (line 29), omit "litigation guardian", substitute "litigation supporter".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(49) Clause 67, page 55 (line 31), omit "litigation guardian", substitute "litigation supporter".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(50) Clause 67, page 56 (line 2), omit "litigation guardian", substitute "litigation supporter".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(51) Clause 67, page 56 (lines 3 to 7), omit paragraph (10)(b), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the Tribunal considers that the party has decision-making ability; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(52) Clause 67, page 56 (line 9), omit "litigation guardian", substitute "litigation supporter".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(53) Clause 67, page 56 (line 11), omit "litigation guardian", substitute "litigation supporter".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(54) Clause 67, page 56 (line 13), omit "litigation guardian", substitute "litigation supporter".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(55) Clause 67, page 56 (line 15), omit "litigation guardian", substitute "litigation supporter".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(56) Clause 67, page 56 (line 17), omit "litigation guardian", substitute "litigation supporter".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(57) Clause 67, page 56 (line 20), omit "litigation guardians", substitute "litigation supporters".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(58) Clause 67, page 56 (line 24), omit "litigation guardians", substitute "litigation supporters".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(59) Clause 67, page 56 (line 25), omit "litigation guardian", substitute "litigation supporter".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(60) Clause 67, page 56 (line 26), omit "litigation guardian", substitute "litigation supporter".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(61) Clause 72, page 60 (line 29), at the end of subclause (2), add "or Tribunal case event".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(62) Clause 83, page 66 (line 25), at the end of paragraph (2)(b), add "to the proceeding or Tribunal case event".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(63) Clause 84, page 67 (line 12), after "<inline font-style="italic">application</inline>)", insert "for review of a decision".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(64) Clause 84, page 67 (lines 21 to 27), omit subclause (2), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Another person may apply to continue with substantive application</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) A person whose interests are affected by the decision may apply to the Tribunal to continue with the substantive application.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(65) Clause 84, page 68 (lines 3 to 8), omit paragraph (4)(a), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the Tribunal considers that the decision does not affect any person's interests other than the applicant; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(66) Clause 87, page 70 (line 13), after "proceeding", insert "or a Tribunal case event of that kind".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(67) Clause 88, page 71 (line 8), omit "(other than a non-participating party)", substitute "to which the dispute resolution process relates (other than a non-participating party to that dispute resolution process or that proceeding)".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(68) Clause 88, page 71 (lines 14 to 16), omit subclause (4), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) However, subsection (3) does not apply if, before the start of the hearing of the proceeding, a party to the proceeding to which the dispute resolution process relates notifies the Tribunal that the party objects to the report being admitted.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(69) Clause 96, page 79 (line 15), after "party", insert "to the proceeding".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(70) Heading to subclause 106(3), page 85 (line 6), at the end of the heading, add "<inline font-style="italic">to the proceeding or hearing</inline>".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(71) Clause 106, page 85 (line 9), after "party", insert "to the proceeding or the hearing of the proceeding".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(72) Clause 106, page 85 (line 29), after "non-participating party", insert "to the proceeding or Tribunal case event".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(73) Clause 109, page 90 (lines 11 to 13), omit paragraph (1)(b), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the decision is:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) made under section 105 (Tribunal decision on review of reviewable decision); and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) not made in accordance with subsection 103(2) (decision agreed by parties); and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(74) Clause 109, page 90 (line 17), after "made", insert "under section 105".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(75) Clause 111, page 92 (after line 25), after subclause (4), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4A) A failure by the Tribunal to provide the things mentioned in paragraphs (2)(c) to (d) by the time required by subsection (3) does not affect the validity of the Tribunal's decision.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(76) Clause 119, page 97 (line 12), at the end of paragraph (b), add "or subsection 157(3) (orders restricting publication or disclosure of findings)".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(77) Clause 128, page 105 (after line 30), at the end of the clause, add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) To avoid doubt, the President is not required to refer any decision of the Tribunal to the guidance and appeals panel.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(78) Clause 130, page 107 (line 23), omit paragraph (5)(a).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(79) Clause 130, page 107 (before line 30), before paragraph (6)(a), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(aa) Division 3 of Part 3 (applying for review of decision);</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(80) Clause 147, page 122 (line 10), after "security", insert "record".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(81) Clause 147, page 122 (line 13), after "proceeding", insert "or Tribunal case event".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(82) Clause 147, page 122 (line 15), after "proceeding", insert "or Tribunal case event".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(83) Clause 157, page 129 (after line 9), at the end of the clause, add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note: Breach of a non-publication or non-disclosure order is an offence (see section 119).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(84) Clause 159, page 131 (lines 3 to 5), omit "may certify, in writing, that, in the opinion of the Director-General or a person authorised by the Director-General under this section", substitute "or a person authorised by the Director-General under this section may certify, in writing, that, in the opinion of the Director-General or authorised person".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(85) Clause 161, page 135 (after line 7), at the end of the clause, add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Delegation</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">security clearance decisions and security clearance suitability assessments</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(11) The ASIO Minister may, in writing, delegate the ASIO Minister's power under subsection (2) in relation to a security clearance decision or a security clearance suitability assessment to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the Director-General of Security; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) an ASIO employee (within the meaning of the ASIO Act), or an ASIO affiliate (within the meaning of that Act), who holds, or is acting in, a position in ASIO that is equivalent to or higher than a position occupied by an SES employee.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(12) In exercising a power under the delegation, the delegate must comply with any written directions of the ASIO Minister.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(86) Clause 201, page 165 (line 1), omit "with".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(87) Clause 202, page 165 (line 14), omit "with".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(88) Clause 205, page 168 (line 10), after "assessed", insert ", by a panel established under section 209,".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(89) Clause 207, page 170 (line 27), after "assessed", insert ", by a panel established under section 209,".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(90) Clause 208, page 172 (line 17), after "assessed", insert ", by a panel established under section 209,".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(91) Heading to clause 209, page 174 (line 1), omit "may", substitute "must".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(92) Clause 209, page 174 (lines 2 to 4), omit subclause (1), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) The Minister must, from time to time, establish one or more panels (<inline font-style="italic">assessment panels</inline>) of persons for the purposes of assessing whether a candidate or candidates are suitable for appointment under section 205, 207, 208 or 227.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(93) Clause 227, page 184 (line 32), after "assessed", insert ", by a panel established under section 209,".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(94) Clause 234, page 187 (after line 31), after subclause (1), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1A) Before the Minister makes a recommendation to the Governor-General, the Minister must consult the President.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(95) Clause 242, page 193 (after line 11), after paragraph (2)(h), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ha) the number of decisions made in accordance with section 103 (if parties reach agreement—review of decisions only) during that year in each jurisdictional area and by the Tribunal as constituted by the guidance and appeals panel for the purposes of proceedings; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(hb) the number of Tribunal decisions affirmed by a federal court during that year; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(hc) the number of Tribunal decisions overturned by a federal court during that year; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(96) Clause 271, page 216 (lines 6 to 10), omit paragraphs (1)(a) and (b), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) both of the following apply:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) a person requests the decision-maker for a reviewable decision to give the person a statement of reasons for the decision under section 268;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) the person is given a statement of reasons for the decision under section 269 or 270; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) a person applies to the Tribunal for review of a reviewable decision for which the decision-maker has given the person a statement of reasons.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(97) Clause 273, page 218 (line 22), omit "and legal or financial assistance", substitute ", legal or financial assistance and review of the operation of this Act".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(98) Clause 281, page 225 (lines 16 to 21), omit paragraph (1)(d), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ca) for a function or power under subsection 114(1) to alter the text of a decision or statement of reasons for a decision—by the person who made the decision;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) for a function or power under subsection 114(1) to alter the text of a decision or statement of reasons for a decision—by an authorised person, but:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) only as approved by the President; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) not if the Tribunal as constituted for the purposes of the proceeding or the person who made the decision is available;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(99) Clause 281, page 225 (line 23), omit "or subsection 115(2) (taxing costs)", substitute ", subsection 115(2) (taxing costs) or a provision mentioned in paragraph 286(a)".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(100) Clause 284, page 227 (table item 5), omit the table item.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(101) Clause 284, page 227 (after table item 10), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(102) Clause 284, page 228 (line 2), after "107", insert ", 108".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(103) Clause 285, page 228 (table item 5, column 1), omit "(other than subsection (8))".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(104) Clause 285, page 229 (table item 10, column 1), omit "subsections 68(2) and (3)", substitute "section 68".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(105) Clause 285, page 229 (after table item 12), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(106) Clause 285, page 229 (after table item 22), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(107) Clause 285, page 230 (line 7), after "107", insert ", 108".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(108) Page 236 (after line 31), at the end of Division 5, add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">294A Review of operation of this Act</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) The Minister must cause to be conducted a review into the operation of this Act and any Act dealing with consequential or transitional matters arising from the enactment of this Act.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Without limiting subsection (1), the review must include consideration of:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) whether the Tribunal is achieving the objective in section 9; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) any other matters relating to the operation of this Act determined by the Minister.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) The review must start within the 3 months before the fifth anniversary of the commencement of this Act.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) The review must be undertaken by one or more persons (the <inline font-style="italic">reviewers</inline>) who, in the Minister's opinion, have appropriate expertise in administrative review.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) The review must include consultation with the Council, members of the public, Tribunal users and any other person or organisation the reviewers consider appropriate.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) The reviewers must give the Minister a written report on the review within 12 months after the fifth anniversary of the commencement of this Act.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(7) The Minister must cause a copy of the report to be tabled in each House of the Parliament within 15 sitting days of that House after the Minister receives the report.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(109) Clause 295, page 237 (after line 28), at the end of the clause, add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) Before making rules affecting the practice, procedure or operations of the Tribunal, the Minister must consult the President.</para></quote>
<para>The government is moving amendments to the Administrative Review Tribunal Bill 2023, the ART bill. These amendments will strengthen the Administrative Review Tribunal model for enhancements to appointment processes, the mechanism for review and the model for social security and others social security bills. In developing these amendments, we've listened to feedback from stakeholders and the recommendations of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs. In addition, minor and technical amendments will ensure that the provisions work as intended, correct minor oversights and clarify the operation of the bill.</para>
<para>First, the amendments will require the government of the day to appoint and use assessment panels when undertaking merit based appointment for all tribunal members, strengthening the bill's already robust appointment provisions. Under the amendments, the minister will only be permitted to appoint members if they have been recommended through the merit based process.</para>
<para>Second, the amendments will reinstate a second review process as a right for parties to review of social services decisions where two-tier review currently exists before the AAT. This responds to concerns from those who work on this kind of appeal. Amending the ART Bill to provide a second review by right for social security matters where it currently exists is intended to support a smoother transition to the new tribunal for these types of cases. Reviews in the tribunal must be informal, accessible and quick, and responsive to the diverse needs of parties. The speed, informality and nonadversarial nature of the current AAT first review is important to retain under the new model. The government expects that the greater ability to tailor the first review to the particular matter will reduce the need for second reviews over time while retaining the speed, accessibility and informality of the first review. However, these amendments provide time to ensure the objectives of the new model are being met.</para>
<para>Within three years of establishing the new tribunal, the government proposes to evaluate the impact and efficacy of the review model for social services decisions, including whether reviews at both levels are informal, quick, accessible and trauma informed. My department and the Department of Social Services will work with stakeholders on the best way to progress this program of work. The tribunal's practice directions will be an important part of shaping how the tribunal's powers and procedures will be exercised to deliver accessible, informal and quick review. I understand the AAT is already giving close consideration to the best way to engage stakeholders, including legal assistance providers, advocates and people with lived experience, in the initial design and continuous improvement of the practice directions.</para>
<para>Third, the bill is amended to more clearly reflect supported rather than substituted decision-making, including by changing the term 'litigation guardian' to 'litigation supporter'. This change responds to comments from the disability sector during the committee process.</para>
<para>Finally, these amendments require a statutory review of the bill and related bills to commence just before the five-year anniversary of the commencement of the bill, ensuring proper assessment of the overall reform. This review, to be conducted by an independent eminent expert or a panel with expertise in administrative law, would be a broad-ranging and holistic examination of the bill and the consequential amendments. The statutory review must also consider the implementation of the legislation, including the tribunal's operations and whether it is achieving its objective.</para>
<para>In conclusion, these amendments demonstrate the government's commitment to listening to stakeholders and ensuring the new tribunal is user focused, efficient and fair.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr HAINES</name>
    <name.id>282335</name.id>
    <electorate>Indi</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to speak in support of the government's amendments. These bills represent the biggest reform to administrative law in a generation; it's hard to overstate the importance. The success or failure of the tribunal will impact thousands of Australians every year, whether accessing our social services, migration, health care or tax systems. At the core of the government's administrative reforms is a commitment to be rid of the crony jobs-for-mates culture that pervaded the AAT in its later years. Delivering on this promise starts with getting the appointment process right, with no room for dodgy deals or political nepotism.</para>
<para>Australians were promised a transparent selection process that would see only the most qualified and experienced people appointed to the tribunal. But this was not what was proposed in the bills first introduced to the House, and I had significant concerns, and I made these clear to the Attorney-General. So let me be clear now: there were significant flaws in the bills. There was no requirement to use selection panels and no clear requirement for the Attorney-General to refer to the panel's recommendations. Without amendment, the bills were quite simply incomplete, with inadequate safeguards against politicisation. And, with such a stumble at its biggest hurdle, I was disappointed with that first iteration, to say the least, because, as Professor Mary Crock has said, the success of the new tribunal will be marked by the quality of the individuals appointed to adjudicate actual cases. So I commend the government for responding to the crossbench's calls, and in particular the calls from the member for Mackellar.</para>
<para>These amendments will not only require the use of selection panels but also ensure that the Attorney-General can only recommend a candidate for appointment if they have been found as suitable by a selection panel through a merits based process. I am hopeful that these amendments will deliver on the merits based process that this government promised, but only time will tell.</para>
<para>In coming years, we will want to know if the ART has delivered for Australians and whether the goal of creating a fairer and more accountable decision review system has indeed been achieved. To answer these questions, first we need to ask them, which is why I am supportive of amendments requiring a review of the ART in five years time. This review will be conducted by experts in administrative law and must include public consultation. This crucial review clause was missing when the bill was first introduced into this place. I found that concerning and, frankly, also very disappointing. But in this 47th Parliament we have a crossbench who won't settle for incomplete legislation. We have held the government accountable to its commitments and called for it to do better. Without the strong advocacy of the crossbench, and particularly the member for Warringah, this amendment would not have seen the light of day.</para>
<para>While I would have preferred a legislative review within three years of the act's operation, I recognise the importance of having this review locked down in the calendar so we can look back in five years time and ask whether the new ART truly is the once-in-a-generation reform that we've been promised. Yet again, the introduction of this amendment shows the power that community Independents can have in the parliament. With the government having responded to crossbench calls, I now feel I am able to give these bills my full support. I commend these amendments to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr SCAMPS</name>
    <name.id>299623</name.id>
    <electorate>Mackellar</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I would also like to thank the Attorney-General for the introduction of these amendments and being very open to consultation with the crossbench about these amendments. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was one of the most important pillars of our democracy. It was abolished for very good reasons, and we thank the Attorney-General for the decision to do that. But it was abolished because it had been politicised and stacked with cronies. In doing so, the competence of this vitally important democratic institution had been undermined, the public's trust in this very important institution had been undermined and one of our democratic values had also been undermined. So it was critically important that the fatal flaw that led to it being abolished in the first place was addressed in the new iteration of the Administrative Review Tribunal.</para>
<para>As the member for Indi said, the first iteration of this bill did not address the independence of the appointments process. It did address 'merits based', and we thank the minister for that, but it did not address the independence. That was not sufficiently covered. There was no requirement for there to be the use of assessment panels. There was something in the bill that said assessment panels may be created from time to time, but there was no mandated assessment panel and it was not in the legislation. So we're very happy to see that there are now mandated assessment panels when members are being appointed to the tribunal and it is in the legislation. This is a very important step for our democracy going forward. We know that civil society has been calling for this, the crossbench has been calling for this and the Greens party has been calling for this.</para>
<para>I would say I've also been calling for this type of independent appointments process to be taken up on a far greater basis in general. We can't continue to have appointments being made at the minister's discretion, because we know that, in particular, this type of flaw comes down to the politicisation of the appointments process. So it's vitally important that we have a robust and independent appointments process across all Commonwealth public appointments, and that's what my 'ending jobs for mates' bill is calling for. With any major Commonwealth appointment, there needs to be an independent process where assessment panels are used, independent selection panels are used and then the minister may choose from that shortlist. If that doesn't happen, then the minister needs to explain to the parliament why they have chosen from outside that shortlist. This is needed for the integrity of our democracy.</para>
<para>Trust in our political system is one of the biggest issues and was one of the biggest issues at the last election. Here on the crossbench, we have been fighting hard in many different ways to rebuild integrity and trust in our political system. I am hopeful that this move by the Attorney-General—and thank you very much—sets a precedent for future important appointments.</para>
<para>I would also say that I strongly support having a review in five years time. I think that's incredibly important as well. Now, with the new amendments, I also am able to give my full support to the Administrative Review Tribunal Bill 2023. I welcome it and welcome very much the work that the Attorney-General and his team have done on this. Thank you.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STEGGALL</name>
    <name.id>175696</name.id>
    <electorate>Warringah</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I would like to note and thank the Attorney-General and his office and team for their engagement in relation to the Administrative Review Tribunal Bill 2023 and the subsequent amendments that we now see. As others have said, it is so important that we have trust and faith in important institutions.</para>
<para>As I noted in my speech yesterday, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal plays an incredibly important role because administrative decisions touch on so many areas of people's lives, and it is important that they be able to have a fair appeals process and a timely appeals process at that.</para>
<para>We know that the AAT, as it was, was not working well. As a barrister prior to entering politics, I was very aware of the difficulties and the problems with that body. It had been politically stacked. So I very much supported the Attorney-General's decision to abolish the AAT as it was and replace it with the Administrative Review Tribunal.</para>
<para>But there were several elements that were incredibly important to insert into the bill. It's good to see the government coming to the table constructively and now to see these amendments being presented. The member for Mackellar moved amendments in relation to the appointment process, making sure that we have a robust merits process for these appointments but also an independent panel to ensure that, when the Attorney-General exercises discretion in relation to appointments, it is about picking from people that have been assessed as qualified and capable for the role and not just making a politically stacked appointment.</para>
<para>It is so important that administrative appeal bodies like this are independent, impartial and free from politics. Australians must feel like they're going to get a fair hearing before an administrative review body that can make key decisions affecting their lives.</para>
<para>So the amendments now being moved by the Attorney-General are very much welcome and in large part address a number of the concerns that many of us have had. A concern I raised was in relation to the statutory review. We are where we are because the previous body had fallen so far from its original purpose and intent and was not working well. It was politically stacked. The amendment the Attorney-General has now presented reflects the amendment I was offering, and I very much welcome that, especially in relation to all the engagement that there's been in relation to this issue. I know many individuals and organisations called for such a review clause to be included in the legislation, because we're not infallible and we need to make sure, through a legislated review process, that the intended changes work as they are meant to. I'd like to acknowledge the work of Catherine Williams from the Centre for Public Integrity for the work she's done with my office—and, I assume, with others—in relation to the concerns.</para>
<para>The statutory review clause the government is offering is a little different. Firstly, it's providing for a review to occur within five years rather than three years as I had proposed. But I accept that there is a time line and a process. Secondly, the review panel is left to the minister's discretion. There's no description of what the reviewer's qualifications should be included in the act or the amendment. This is in contrast to the membership of a review panel that I had proposed with my amendments—specifically, that it must comprise three members appointed by the minister and include a former judge of the High Court of Australia, of the Federal Court of Australia or of the supreme court of a state or territory; a person with experience in community advocacy and engagement relating to matters dealt with by this act; and a person with significant knowledge or experience relating to matters dealt with by this act. Those three qualifications would help give confidence that, in the review process, the review panel will have the necessary skills. So I put this question to the Attorney-General: how will he ensure that those appointed as reviewers for the statutory review will be appropriately qualified? What, in fact, does he have in mind or intend in the provision for appointment of a statutory review panel?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Warringah for her support for the bill and the amendments, and I would seek to answer the question that she's raised about the qualifications of the reviewer. It's a fairly familiar form now in this parliament that, particularly for new institutions or new legislative arrangements, we provide for a statutory review after some years, particularly when we're making substantial changes, as this new model of an Administrative Review Tribunal does. It is important that we go back and check that we are achieving the objectives of the reform. Clause 294A(4) will set out the required qualifications for the reviewer. It will provide that the reviewer must, in the minister's opinion, have the appropriate expertise in administrative review. It's a clause that I think ensures that the review of the act and of the operation of the tribunal will be conducted by an independent reviewer whom the minister has considered to have the appropriate expertise and requisite knowledge to conduct the review.</para>
<para>I think that it's possible to say that over the last 20 years or so, where we have provided for statutory reviews, almost invariably appropriate reviewers are appointed. The greater difficulty is making sure that, when a review is conducted, the government of the day acts on the review report. I have in mind there the excellent review of the Public Interest Disclosure Act was done by Philip Moss. When that bill passed through the parliament in 2013, appropriately, I, in my capacity as Special Minister of State at the time, provided for a review and for a reviewer to be appointed. The former government did appoint an appropriate reviewer in Philip Moss, an eminent Australian public servant, but, sadly, he having produced an excellent review of the Public Interest Disclosure Act in 2016, nothing happened.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Wilkie</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Well, it still hasn't happened.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I take the interjection: about half of the recommended matters in Mr Moss's report have been acted on, and we have a second stage of reforms still to come.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BATES</name>
    <name.id>300246</name.id>
    <electorate>Brisbane</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the Attorney-General for these amendments. I really want to home in on the point that previously the Liberal government completely stacked this panel, and I really would like the Attorney-General to explain to the House and to the people of Brisbane how that will not happen again under these amendments. What stops the Labor government from doing the exact same thing?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Many speakers in the debate on this bill have spoken about what occurred over the last nine years of the former government, and I don't think I need to rehearse that much travelled ground again. We have provided in the bill, strengthened by the amendments I've brought to the House today, for a merit based appointments process for all future appointments to the Administrative Review Tribunal. It's of course the case that any future parliament might choose to again change the method of appointment to this tribunal, but our government is committed to a merit based appointments process. We legislated for merit based appointment processes for the Australian Human Rights Commission, in the first bill I brought to this parliament. We are legislating for merit based appointments processes to be required to be used for all future appointments to this Administrative Review Tribunal should it pass through both houses of our parliament.</para>
<para>By way of further reassurance, I would point to the record of our government since coming to office in that our government has appointed 115 new members to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal by using a merit based appointments process not required by the statute at present. Having a mandatory merit based appointments process in future for the Administrative Review Tribunal will cause our government no difficulty at all. I'd perhaps be able to point to the fact, regarding those 115 appointments made to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal using merit based appointments processes since the last election, there has not to my knowledge been a breath of criticism of any of the 115 quality members who have been appointed to serve on the tribunal.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>E0D</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that the amendments be agreed to.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill, as amended, agreed to.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Third Reading</title>
            <page.no>22</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a third time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a third time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Bill 2023</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="r7127" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Bill 2023</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>22</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TINK</name>
    <name.id>300124</name.id>
    <electorate>North Sydney</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move the second reading amendment as circulated in my name:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that this bill maintains the carve out of a separate, more restrictive procedural code for the Migration and Refugee Division in the<inline font-style="italic"> Migration Act 1958;</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) further notes that the bill falls short of meeting its objectives because of its unequal treatment of migrant and refugee applicants;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) notes that non-citizens, including those seeking asylum, refugees, and the stateless, already experience structural exclusion and intersecting barriers to accessing justice once they enter into Australia, including impacts of trauma, language barriers, mental health issues, financial distress, and cultural differences; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) calls on the Government to ensure all applicants can equally access a fair and just review and accordingly remove the separate set of procedures under the <inline font-style="italic">Migration Act 1958</inline>, from this bill so the procedures that apply to applicants generally, also apply to migrant and refugee applicants in the same way".</para></quote>
<para>The package of bills moved through this House in the past few days—the Administrative Review Tribunal Bill 2023 and the consequential and transitional bills No. 1 and No. 2—will deliver much-needed reform to the administrative review processes in this country, and this is welcomed by my community in North Sydney. Indeed, as a community, we've long argued that the decisions of government should always be open to public scrutiny and that elected representatives should do everything in their power to ensure that the people they represent not only participate in the decisions that affect them but also ultimately find ways to make decisions for themselves.</para>
<para>In this context, the administrative review system is one of the most important lines of defence when it comes to protecting individuals' rights from unfair use of power, and its effective operation is therefore essential for public confidence in government. Yet, sadly, the current Administrative Appeals Tribunal has been plagued with inefficiencies and failures after years of abuse. Consequently, this reform cannot come soon enough.</para>
<para>But, in pursuing this reform, this government has ultimately missed an opportunity to finally redress a fatal flaw in our democracy and one that has long stained our international human rights reputation, that being our continued pursuit of the idea that not all people are equal before the law, as, while much of this legislation represents an improvement to the administrative review process in Australia, it falls short of meeting its overall stated objective of creating a unified system because of its unequal treatment of migrant and refugee applicants. Quite simply, many of the benefits sought to be introduced will not apply to the migrant and refugee division, which, given the workload of that division, means they will not apply to the majority of cases currently seeking redress.</para>
<para>It has taken years of advocacy from civil society groups, human rights bodies and refugee and migrant communities to get us to where we are today with this legislation, and I commend the Attorney-General and his team for bringing us this far. But we can take it further.</para>
<para>The amendment I am moving today calls on the government to note that, by maintaining the carve-out of a separate and more restrictive code for the migrant and refugee division in the Migration Act of 1958, the bill ultimately falls short of meeting its objectives. At the same time, it notes that noncitizens, including those seeking asylum, refugees and the stateless, already experience structural exclusion and intersecting barriers to accessing justice once they enter into Australia, including the impacts of trauma, language barriers, mental health issues, financial distress and cultural differences. Finally, it calls on the government to ensure that all applicants can equally access a fair and just review. Accordingly, it removes the separate set of procedures under the Migration Act 1958 from this bill so the procedures that apply to applicants can apply to one and all.</para>
<para>If Australia is serious about having systems that uphold our human rights obligations, then we need to address the current weaknesses we have every step of the way. I call the government to take these amendments seriously and strengthen this legislation, as it is incredibly disheartening to see that those who are seeking our protection continue to be treated as persons with inferior procedural entitlements, when we live in a country where nearly one in two Australians were either born overseas or have an overseas-born parent.</para>
<para>Every human being is born equal and deserving of justice. No-one is above the law. And the law should apply to all equally, regardless of their status in society. This means that the same standards must apply to all when it comes to our Administrative Review Tribunal processes, regardless of race, colour, gender, language, religion, political beliefs, status, or any other unlawful reason. Citizens or noncitizens, all people deserve to be treated with dignity and respect for their basic human rights. We must ensure this new system is one that sees human rights protected for all, equally. Let's give this Administrative Review Tribunal the very best shot we have and ensure that every applicant before it receives equal and fair treatment.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>E0D</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the amendment seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Wilkie</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Deputy Speaker, I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BATES</name>
    <name.id>300246</name.id>
    <electorate>Brisbane</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I just want to say that we welcome the creation of this new body to replace the AAT—especially, as I said before, given the political stacking by the former coalition government. It should never have been possible to appoint political mates, especially those without legal qualifications, to a federal tribunal responsible for hearing cases on social security and migration—matters which can often be literally life and death for people.</para>
<para>Delays in the AAT are very real, and it is hoped that this new tribunal is not characterised by these delays in the same way. The Administrative Review Tribunal will be an extremely high-volume tribunal, which will have an impact each year on tens of thousands of individuals and families. There are a number of defects with the legislation as drafted, which we believe will need to be remedied. This new body will be in place for decades and will have a broad jurisdiction to deal with critically important matters relating to people's rights and entitlements under federal law. We cannot afford to rush it or get this wrong.</para>
<para>We have worked with stakeholders, including the Centre for Public Integrity, to address the bill's provisions for fixing appointments to the new body to make these measures mandatory, rather than optional, and it's good to see amendments from the government to that effect, as this was a key promise by the ALP regarding the new tribunal. It's extremely positive that, after significant public pressure and growing political opposition, the government amendments will now go some way to addressing this. The Greens have consistently advocated for a proper review of the operation of this new tribunal. We have been joined in this by numerous NGOs and engaged stakeholders. The government is now responding to that pressure by bringing amendments in to require such a review.</para>
<para>One of the core requirements for support of this bill is that it cannot cause harm, especially to some of the most vulnerable existing users of the AAT. As drafted, this bill does not meet that test, by abolishing critical review rights for people on Centrelink. The Greens believe it is necessary to preserve the existing two-tier jurisdiction to resolve appeals from Centrelink or Services Australia. This existing two-tier review process is critical to providing a just remedy for some 10,000 to 12,000 of the most vulnerable applicants each year. The government has sought to move a large number of amendments on this issue, and our Senate team is working them through. While they appear to go some way towards reinstating the original two-tier review process, the drafting is somewhat opaque and it is unclear how they will achieve this goal in practice.</para>
<para>There remain multiple elements in this reform that provide unfair outcomes for refugee and migration cases in this new body. While there are some modest improvements to the existing law, such as the abolition of the IAA, it continues to have multiple unfair non-discretionary time frames and unfair adverse inferences in this part of its jurisdiction. Assessing the real impact of these amendments is a complex task with an already incredibly lengthy and convoluted bill that has hundreds and hundreds of accompanying pages of text in the explanatory memorandum and in the transitional provisions.</para>
<para>As noted above, this is a generational reform and we need to take the time to get this right. While we will be supporting the bill and not opposing any government amendments in this House, we reserve our position in the Senate. To that end, we will continue to be guided by the valuable input of stakeholders and by two core principles— that this reform must leave no-one behind and must leave no door open for future governments to undermine its integrity.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to briefly address the second reading amendment that has been moved by the member for North Sydney. The government opposes this second reading amendment, and I want to make some general comments about these bills. The ART bills substantially harmonise procedural arrangements for review of decisions under the Migration Act, which is a very substantial improvement compared with the current system.</para>
<para>Under the current arrangements—that's the Administrative Appeals Tribunal and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act—none of the provisions relating to the AAT's powers and procedures apply at all to reviews of migration and protection decisions. Instead—and this has happened over many years—there's a separate set of powers and procedures that are set out in the Migration Act called codes of procedure. The Administrative Review Tribunal bills remove this dichotomy. They apply standard tribunal powers to migration and protection matters.</para>
<para>As far as possible, that's the approach that we've taken with the new Administrative Review Tribunal: it's to have standard processes for all of the tribunal's jurisdictions, including—and this is a very major change—migration and protection matters. There are a small number of special procedures retained, as there are in separate legislation for many jurisdictions, to ensure that tribunal reviews are workable within the framework of the migration system. Of course, it's the case that we're going to have to make sure in the coming years—if the Administrative Review Tribunal legislation passes the Senate and we create the tribunal, as we sincerely hope will happen in short order—that the intent of these reforms it being achieved. That's what the statutory review enables us to do.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WATSON-BROWN</name>
    <name.id>300127</name.id>
    <electorate>Ryan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In regard to this bill, we note there have been significant concerns raised about the accessibility of the tribunal, particularly to people who require translators. My question is what steps are you taking to deliver on this? We understand the government amendments seek to address concerns raised by stakeholders regarding the fact that the tier 1 system currently available for social security matters will not be preserved under the new ART. Can you advise how these amendments work to deliver a low-cost, accessible jurisdiction comparable to tier 1? We would be interested in that.</para>
<para>We'd also note that many of the issues currently experienced in the AAT are caused by Services Australia's poor engagement and communication processes, which often have significant impact on individuals. We would that hope there would be steps taken to ensure this is resolved.</para>
<para>We know a number of appointments have been made in the last month to the tribunal. We would be interested in understanding what process was undertaken in these appointments and, in particular, if selection panels are envisaged in the bill, as amended by the government amendments. We would be interested to know what steps are being taken to have diversity of representation on such a panel.</para>
<para>The government review amendment responds to concerns many in the sector had about lack of a review plan in the original legislation. So, our question would be why is there a five-year review proposed instead of the more usual three-year review? It seems that we should be concerned. This is a quite long time for the tribunal to be operating if there are significant issues with it that might be identified by a review.</para>
<para>We feel there should be diversity of representation in the membership of the tribunal and that reporting from the ART should include decisions affirmed or overturned by the Federal Court. We believe there should be a complaints mechanism for member conduct. We think it would be a good idea to have a cooling-off period for appointees from party roles and to require members to not be members of political parties to ensure there's that important independence. They should also resign from the ART before standing as candidates. Appointees, we believe, should not be lobbyists or work in relevant departments for four years—no Defence or contractors. We also believe that we should have access to publicly published qualifications of appointees. This is absolutely critical.</para>
<para>Social security and family assistance matters are also of concern. The two-tier system should be restored with, essentially, the continuation of the social security and child support division of the AAT. An alternative to that would be to pause tier 2 removal until reforms from disability and robodebt royal commissions, the NLAP review and the NDIS review are in place around national legal aid issues. We believe there should be a requirement for Services Australia to submit statements of reasons where the ARO decision is unclear, including at the request of the applicant. ARO training and professional development is critical to fix the deficiencies in ARO decision letters, fixing a backlog of ARO reviews.</para>
<para>We note that there have been serious concerns about the removal of the two-tier system, in terms of the removal of inquisitorial, non-adversarial, informal and accessible options. Most do not have legal advice before their hearing, which is problematic. This makes the administrative review less accessible. Therefore, the need to get it right first is quite difficult, and very difficult without the appropriate legal advice. We believe this will deter applicants, see withdrawal of appeals and reduce fairness, especially for unrepresented applicants. Unless matters are referred to the GAP per discretion of the president, there is only one shot at appeal, which we think is unfair and untenable. Self-representing will be harder in a more formal tribunal.</para>
<para>In terms of the Migration and Refugee Division, there needs to be a harmony of procedures for review with the other divisions of the ART; that is from the UNSW and the ASRC. Removing shorter deadlines should be happening, applicable to migration matters—especially not less than 28 days for character related decisions. We believe we should allow applicants to apply for legal assistance for their application before the tribunal by removing 336P(2)(l) of the consequential bill. We should remove 359A(4)(d); the ART should notify applicants of adverse information in Home Affairs decisions it intends to rely on. Hearings in person should be the default, which means 36(f) needs to be fixed. If the Attorney-General joins the proceeding, the Commonwealth should pay the costs of that. We believe an interpreter should be provided if requested, and that translated materials must be provided; the person should be asked for consent to this. The ART should only be able to make a decision without a hearing if it favours the applicant. The ART must follow a tribunal guidance decision as a matter of law. We believe we should remove 362A of the consequential bill to maintain an entitlement to seek materials from the ART—or fix FOI, which is unlikely. And we would like the removal of section 367 of the Migration Act, which requires the ART to draw unfavourable inferences regarding new claims and evidence.</para>
<para>In terms of the ARC, we believe that responsibilities must include reviewing, analysing and publishing data on the decision-making and operation of the ART, including the GAP review of National Legal Aid. Data should be made public. A member of the ARC should be a person with disability and lived experience. The ARC should have the power to commission research.</para>
<para>In terms of guidance and appeal panels, the president should be required to exercise discretion where unrepresented applicants ask to go to GAP, to refer GAP, unless it is vexatious or obviously unmeritorious. Secondly, the GAP review should mean legal assistance is provided.</para>
<para>In terms of accessibility issues, we would suggest adding an object to the bill regarding disability, implementing the CRPD, and regarding trauma informed and family violence informed—and introducing a nonadversarial and accessible first tier of review for NDIS matters where members with disability expertise and understanding of the NDIS are involved. Fee waivers should be legislated for financial hardship and vulnerable applicants. Longstanding barriers to First Nations communities are a real concern; we would ask what's being done there in terms of engagement with those First Nations communities, and how provisions apply in the context of domestic and family violence. The EM should include training on domestic and family violence as an example of training for tribunal members.</para>
<para>There are also issues around legacy. What's going to be done for the 9,000 people failed by the fast-track system? The IAA should cease processing the caseload so the ART can be used instead. And another question is: what consideration of previous AAT decisions is there, and do we need to amend section 218?</para>
<para>These are a number of concerns we have. We would be very interested to hear the Attorney-General's response.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question before the House is that the amendment moved by the member for North Sydney be agreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [10:48]<br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>13</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Bandt, A. P.</name>
                  <name>Bates, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Chandler-Mather, M.</name>
                  <name>Daniel, Z.</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                  <name>Le, D. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Ryan, M. M.</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z.</name>
                  <name>Tink, K. J. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                  <name>Wilkie, A. D.</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>54</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Aly, A.</name>
                  <name>Ananda-Rajah, M.</name>
                  <name>Belyea, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Bowen, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Butler, M. C.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Charlton, A. H. G.</name>
                  <name>Chesters, L. M.</name>
                  <name>Claydon, S. C.</name>
                  <name>Coker, E. A.</name>
                  <name>Collins, J. M.</name>
                  <name>Doyle, M. J. J.</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Fernando, C.</name>
                  <name>Freelander, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Garland, C. M. L.</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                  <name>Giles, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P.</name>
                  <name>Gosling, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Hill, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Husic, E. N.</name>
                  <name>Joyce, B. T. G.</name>
                  <name>Kearney, G. M.</name>
                  <name>Keogh, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Khalil, P.</name>
                  <name>Lawrence, T. N.</name>
                  <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                  <name>Leigh, A. K.</name>
                  <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                  <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                  <name>McBride, E. M.</name>
                  <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Mulino, D.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>Payne, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Perrett, G. D.</name>
                  <name>Phillips, F. E.</name>
                  <name>Pitt, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                  <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Vamvakinou, M.</name>
                  <name>Wells, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, J. H.</name>
                  <name>Zappia, A.</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.<br />Original question agreed to.<br />Bill read a second time.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Consideration in Detail</title>
            <page.no>27</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TINK</name>
    <name.id>300124</name.id>
    <electorate>North Sydney</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak to amendment (1) as circulated in my name. The package of bills moved through this House in the last few days—the Administrative Review Tribunal Bill 2023, the Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Bill 2023 and the Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 2) Bill 2024—will deliver much-needed reform to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. However, it must be noted that, as it currently stands, the provisions within the Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Bill mean that, ultimately, this reform will fall short of meeting its objective of creating a unified system because of its unequal treatment of migrant and refugee applicants.</para>
<para>Quite simply, because of the provisions in the piece of consequential legislation, some of the benefits sought to be introduced by the overall reform will not apply to the Migrant and Refugee Division. Given the backlog and ongoing work of that division, this means a significant number of the key reforms will not apply to most cases currently seeking redress. It has taken years of advocacy from civil society groups, human rights bodies and refugee and migrant communities to get us to where we are today with this legislation. But we must take it further.</para>
<para>The amendment I am moving addresses the different and unfair time limits that apply for some refugees and migrants seeking an administrative review. It has been put to me by advocates as one of the key elements of the separate procedural code that must change if we are to truly realise just treatment for all.</para>
<para>Indeed, the Refugee Advice and Casework Service submission on the ART Bill sought to draw our attention to the fact that the general rule that provides for 28 days to lodge an appeal will not be extended to those seeking a review from within detention. Rather, these refugees and people seeking asylum would have only seven days to apply for a review of a decision. I want to recognise that this is significantly more than the two days currently provided under the existing AAT. But the truth is that it's still not enough time when, in the majority of cases, we are talking about people who are already facing structural exclusion and intersecting barriers to accessing justice. These barriers include the impacts of trauma, language barriers, mental health issues, financial distress and cultural differences. In the pursuit of equality before the law, any reform to the administrative review processes in this country must account for this. Section 347(5) of the bill stipulates that the power of the ART to extend these deadlines under clause 19 of the bill would also not be applicable to reviewable migration and protection decisions, further excluding applications with a migrant or refugee background from the benefits of this refreshed ART.</para>
<para>This amendment seeks to change that. This amendment, quite simply, removes sections 347(3) through to 347(5) of Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Bill 2023 so that the general timing rule for making an application for review under division 3 of the ART would apply to migration and protection applicants as it does for all others. If Australia is serious about having systems that uphold our human rights obligations, I appeal to the government to take these amendments seriously and strengthen this legislation. In the words of North Sydney constituent and long-time human rights advocate Professor Mary Krock: 'Where it is separate for migration applicants, the code is always more punitive and restrictive than the general ART provisions.'</para>
<para>It is very disappointing that migrants should continue to be treated as persons with inferior procedural entitlements, specifically at a time when almost one in two Australians were either born overseas or have an overseas-born parent. We should stop seeing migrants as less worthy of procedural entitlements just because they are non-citizens. The law should apply equally to all people regardless of race, colour, gender, language, religion, political beliefs, status in society, or any other unlawful reason.</para>
<para>As a nation Australia recognises the following rights and treaties: the right to seek asylum and be free from persecution; the right to equality under the law and equal protection of the law; the right to enjoy the same treatment as a national in matters pertaining to access to the courts; the right in full equality to a fair and public hearing by a fair and impartial tribunal in the determination of rights and obligations; and the right to be recognised everywhere as a person before the law. Ultimately, citizen or non-citizen, all people deserve to be treated with dignity and have their basic human rights respected. We must ensure that this new system is one that delivers on that obligation. I believe this amendment does just that. I commend the amendment to the Attorney-General.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Can I remind the member for North Sydney that you are required to move the amendment</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TINK</name>
    <name.id>300124</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I move the amendment circulated in my name:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Schedule 2, item 136, page 60 (line 18) to page 61 (line 3), omit subsections 347(3) to (5).</para></quote>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I take the member for North Sydney's comments to be in large part an endorsement of the approach that the government has taken, which is that the ART bill standardises timeframes for a majority of decisions under the Migration Act. When I stood before to speak to the member for North Sydney's second reading amendment, I explained overall the way in which this works, which is that we have legislation before the parliament which standardises timeframes for the majority of decisions under the Migration Act to the standard ART timeframes for making an application for review, which cannot be less than 28 days.</para>
<para>But there are two exceptions, and I will come to them in a minute. Perhaps this is a reflection of the complexity of government decision-making, but there are reasons for the exceptions, and it is for that reason that the government cannot support these particular proposed amendments. I will endeavour to explain why. The two exceptions are first where a person is in immigration detention, for which the timeframe is seven days. So we're taking the opportunity to increase what was formerly two days for some applications—a pretty short time—to seven days. The other exception is where a person's visa has been cancelled on character grounds: the timeframe for that is to be nine days.</para>
<para>In the government's view is not feasible to remove these exceptions. They are required to minimise the amount of time that a person spends in detention and to maintain the overall integrity of Australia's migration system. All that is required within the seven-day window is that the application is made. The requirements for doing so are minimal and the applicant does not need to submit additional documentation until the proceeding is underway. So we have a very special form of administrative decision that is dealt with in these two exceptions. It's decisions relating to immigration detention. We've got a government approach that is, very directly, that the amount of time that a person spends in immigration detention should be reduced, should be minimised. So there would be a problem in applying the standard ART time frames, for making an application for review not less than 28 days, to the immigration detention setting. We've got much shorter time frames, which are required to minimise the amount of time that a person spends in detention. I would hope that reason for having special provisions for immigration detention review matters is understood.</para>
<para>As to extensions of time, which would be the other effect of the amendment that the member for North Sydney is moving, the immigration system does rest on having certainty as to a person's visa status at all times. In order to provide an opportunity for visa applicants to seek a review of a decision, applicants are provided with a bridging visa that expires a short time after the time frame for making an application for review comes to an end. If the tribunal were able to grant an extension of time for making an application for review of these decisions, it wouldn't be possible to determine the end of the application period. That would be incompatible with how the migration system works.</para>
<para>We're here recognising that the migration system is a specialised and quite distinct part of Australian government decision-making. We have tried to, at the same time, as far as possible, standardise all of the review processes for all of the myriad decisions that the Administrative Review Tribunal will look at. There needs to be a recognition that, for a small number of administrative decisions, particularly some decisions under the Migration Act, we need to make special provisions, which is what we're doing. It should not be looked at through the frame of discriminating against some people because they are not Australian citizens. It needs to be looked at through the frame of having a migration system that works. As I've said, if it were possible for the— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TINK</name>
    <name.id>300124</name.id>
    <electorate>North Sydney</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the Attorney-General for standing and voicing all of that context around why the government won't be supporting these amendments. I would just offer the following back: arguably this reform of the AAT is the most important reform that we've seen in over a decade. I know from personal interactions with the Attorney-General and his staff that they are very committed to re-establishing an administrative review process in this country that Australians can be confident in, and that they can trust that the process is fair and equal for all. The truth of the matter is that, as long as we continue to carve out people who find themselves in a situation within our immigration systems where they are not given the same treatment under law as every other person living in this country, we are creating a two-tier system.</para>
<para>I want to respond to what the Attorney-General said with a number of things. No. 1, I don't think there's any person that has any connection with the refugee and asylum-seeking sector in this country who doesn't know that the two days previously applied under the AAT was completely and wholly unacceptable. It was unworkable. We're not talking about pleasant centres where legal advocates can enter an environment to talk calmly with clients around what their legal recourse may be. Many of the people being held in these immigration detention facilities and awaiting a decision around their status of citizenship are highly traumatised individuals. They come from environments where they've already experienced trauma. They're now arriving and have had to face a number of intersectional discriminatory behaviours when it comes to our country. Many of them have not been fully assimilated when they've arrived. They've escaped violent situations only to find themselves thrust into our community with no appropriate education or appropriate assimilation, and then they find themselves in trouble with the law and back in immigration detention.</para>
<para>The refugee area largely does welcome this reform. We need to be really clear. As the Attorney-General said and as he and I have spoken about, this is 500 per cent better than what we have had in this country to date. If I were a teacher, I'd be giving this a nine out of 10. The reality is, though, that what I'm arguing is that the government could get a 10 out of 10, and they could do it by being braver than the governments we've seen in the past and by stepping forward and saying, 'We are prepared to be the agency of change.' In fact, a change in this legislation could ultimately push changes in our immigration detention systems, which arguably are long past due for reform. As many in this place would know, there are widespread calls for a royal commission into how our detention system works in this country.</para>
<para>What I'm saying here will be no surprise to the Attorney-General, because we have talked about it and his team has been really great in talking to my team about what we're seeking to achieve here. There are some moments, I believe, when a government has the opportunity to step into a true ambition that fundamentally shifts the dial in how a country addresses certain challenges.</para>
<para>It's interesting to see that we have the immigration minister sitting with the Attorney-General. I feel like I have a great audience to have this discussion in front of. If we are going to reform this process meaningfully, in a way that sees us as a nation fundamentally commit to realising our international obligations under all the international treaties that we say we abide by—whether that's the right to seek asylum and be free from persecution under the Refugee Convention; the right to equality before the law and equal protection of law under the UDHR; the right to enjoy the same treatment as a national in matters pertaining to access to the courts, again under the Refugee Convention; the right, in full equality, to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal in the determination of rights and obligations under the UDHR; or the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law under the UDHR—the time for that is now, with this piece of legislation.</para>
<para>So I thank the Attorney-General and his team for their time, but I continue to argue that the best-case scenario would be that even those in detention would be treated in the same way as every other person under the Administrative Review Tribunal process.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I also thank the member for North Sydney for her constructive engagement on these provisions of the Administrative Review Tribunal Bill 2023 and the Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Bill 2023, to which she has moved amendments. To use the language of the member for North Sydney, I think I can say fairly that the government is committed to shifting the dial, and I would hope that the whole of this legislation that we have brought to the parliament and the amendments that we have brought to the parliament, including the amendments that I'm about to move to the consequential provisions bill, show that we have an ongoing commitment to making sure that appropriate reform takes place.</para>
<para>But on these particular matters, although we share the objective of making sure that the whole of the administrative review system, including the review of Migration Act decisions, is done as accessibly and fairly as possible and in the optimum possible way, we've come to a different view about what is presently the appropriately workable provision, bearing in mind what I think are totally agreed objectives: the objective that the amount of time that a person spends in immigration detention should be minimised and the further objective of needing to provide certainty in a migration system, which rests on certainty of a person's visa status at all times. Were we to agree to these amendments as proposed by the member for North Sydney, we would be producing incompatibility with the current working of the migration system and also producing an outcome that would be inconsistent with the government's policy of minimising the amount of time that people spend in detention. For those reasons, I say again the government can't support the proposed amendments, not because we don't have a shared objective with the member for North Sydney but rather because of our view that they would be unworkable in the context of the volume of decisions on visas in the context of the need for certainty as to a person's immigration status and because of the probability that they would lead to people spending more time in immigration detention, which is the opposite of what we would wish to achieve.</para>
<para>Question negatived.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present the two supplementary explanatory memoranda to the bill, and I ask leave of the House to move government amendments (1) to (45) on sheet TM116 and government amendments (1) to (50) on sheet UP104, as circulated, together.</para>
<para>Leave granted.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I move government amendments (1) to (45) on sheet TM116 and government amendments (1) to (50) on sheet UP104 together:</para>
<quote><para class="block">SHEET TM116</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Schedule 3, item 6, page 96 (lines 8 and 9), omit the definition of <inline font-style="italic">guidance and appeals panel application</inline> in subsection 3(1).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Schedule 3, item 14, page 97 (lines 8 to 14), omit the item, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">14 Section 110 (paragraph beginning "If a person is dissatisfied with a decision of the AAT")</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Repeal the paragraph, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">If a decision has been reviewed by the ART, in some circumstances the ART Act allows a person to apply to refer the matter to the ART as constituted by the guidance and appeals panel for further review.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">In other circumstances, application may be made for review (a "second review") of the decision by the ART on ART review. Applications for second review are made under the ART Act.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Schedule 3, items 20 and 21, page 98 (lines 4 to 14), omit the items.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) Schedule 3, item 25, page 99 (lines 4 and 5), omit "unless the proceeding is in relation to a guidance and appeals panel application".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) Schedule 3, item 25, page 99 (lines 9 and 10), omit "unless the proceeding is in relation to a guidance and appeals panel application".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) Schedule 3, item 26, page 100 (lines 1 to 22), omit the item, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">26 Subsection 115(2)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Repeal the subsection, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) However, if the President of the ART refers the application to the guidance and appeals panel under section 122 of the ART Act, section 31 (decision cannot be altered outside Tribunal process) of that Act applies to the decision after the referral is made.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(7) Schedule 3, item 27, page 100 (lines 25 and 26), omit "(other than a guidance and appeals panel application)".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(8) Schedule 3, page 102 (after line 3), after item 32, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">32A Subsection 122(1)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">After "subsection (4)", insert "and the outcome of any application under section 294 of the ART Act".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(9) Schedule 3, page 102 (after line 8), after item 33, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">33A Paragraph 123(a)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Repeal the paragraph, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the ART has reviewed:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) a decision (a <inline font-style="italic">child support decision</inline>) on application referred to in section 89 of the <inline font-style="italic">Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988</inline>; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) a decision on application referred to in section 131D of the ART Act in relation to a child support decision; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(10) Schedule 3, item 35, page 102 (lines 15 to 18), omit the item.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(11) Schedule 3, item 60, page 107 (after line 11), after the definition of <inline font-style="italic">guidance and appeals panel proceeding</inline> in subsection 4(1), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">second review</inline> has the same meaning as in the ART Act.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(12) Schedule 3, item 64, page 107 (lines 23 to 28), omit the item, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">64 Section 87A (paragraph beginning "The person may")</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Repeal the paragraph, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">If a decision has been reviewed by the ART, in some circumstances the ART Act allows a person to apply to refer the matter to the ART as constituted by the guidance and appeals panel for further review.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">In other circumstances, application may be made for review (a "second review") of the decision by the ART on ART review, or as the original decision-maker. Applications for second review are made under the ART Act.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(13) Schedule 3, item 73, page 109 (lines 5 and 6), omit the item, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">73 Subsection 92(4)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Repeal the subsection, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) If the ART refuses the extension application, the notice under subsection (3) must include, or be accompanied by, a statement to the effect that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) subject to this Act and the ART Act, the person may apply to the ART for second review of the decision; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the person may, under section 268 of the ART Act, request a statement of reasons for the decision.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(14) Schedule 3, item 76, page 110 (before line 23), before subsection 95B(1A), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1AA) However, if the President of the ART refers the application to the guidance and appeals panel under section 122 of the ART Act, section 31 (decision cannot be altered outside Tribunal process) of that Act applies to the decision after the referral is made.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(15) Schedule 3, item 76, page 110 (line 23), omit "Subsection (1) does not", substitute "Subsections (1) and (1AA) do not".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(16) Schedule 3, page 112 (after line 24), after item 83, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">83A Paragraph 95M(a)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Repeal the paragraph, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the ART has reviewed:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) a decision (a <inline font-style="italic">family assistance decision</inline>) on application referred to in section 111 of the Family Assistance Administration Act; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) a decision on application referred to in section 131D of the ART Act in relation to a family assistance decision; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(17) Schedule 3, item 92, page 114 (line 33), omit paragraph 110Q(b), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) an application to the ART for ART review of that objection or second review of a decision on that ART review;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(18) Schedule 3, item 93, page 115 (lines 8 to 10), omit paragraph 110W(1)(b), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) no application may be made under the ART Act for second review of the decision or to refer the decision to the guidance and appeals panel; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(19) Schedule 3, item 94, page 115 (lines 13 and 14), omit paragraph 110W(1A)(b), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) an application may be made under the ART Act for second review of the decision or to refer the decision to the guidance and appeals panel; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(20) Schedule 3, item 96, page 115 (line 24), after "ART review", insert "or second review".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(21) Schedule 3, item 97, page 115 (lines 27 to 30), omit the item.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(22) Schedule 3, item 98, page 116 (line 4), after "panel", insert "or second review".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(23) Schedule 3, item 106, page 117 (lines 15 to 20), omit the item, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">106 Section 4 (paragraph beginning "Part 5-3")</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Repeal the paragraph, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">If a decision has been reviewed by the ART, in some circumstances the ART Act allows a person to apply to refer the matter to the ART as constituted by the guidance and appeals panel for further review.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">In other circumstances, application may be made for review (a "second review") of the decision by the ART on ART review. Applications for second review are made under the ART Act.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(24) Schedule 3, item 113, page 119 (lines 1 to 7), omit the item, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">113 Section 213 (paragraph beginning "AAT first review is available")</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Repeal the paragraph, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">ART review is available for certain claimant decisions (called ART reviewable claimant decisions). People whose interests are affected by ART reviewable claimant decisions may apply for ART review of those decisions.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">A person may also apply to the ART for second review if the person is dissatisfied with the decision of the ART on review of an ART reviewable claimant decision. Applications for second review are made under the ART Act.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(25) Schedule 3, item 116, page 119 (lines 20 to 26), omit the item.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(26) Schedule 3, item 122, page 121 (before line 30), before subsection 226(2), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1A) However, if the President of the ART refers the application to the guidance and appeals panel under section 122 of the ART Act, section 31 (decision cannot be altered outside Tribunal process) of that Act applies to the decision after the referral is made.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(27) Schedule 3, item 122, page 121 (line 30), omit "Subsection (1) does not", substitute "Subsections (1) and (1A) do not".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(28) Schedule 3, item 144, page 126 (lines 20 to 26), omit the item, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">144 Section 139 (paragraph beginning "If a person is dissatisfied with a decision of the AAT")</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Repeal the paragraph, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">If a person is dissatisfied with a decision of the ART on ART review, the person may apply to the ART for second review.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(29) Schedule 3, item 148, page 127 (lines 8 to 13), omit the item.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(30) Schedule 3, item 169, page 132 (lines 4 and 5), omit "unless the proceeding is in relation to a guidance and appeals panel application".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(31) Schedule 3, item 169, page 132 (lines 9 and 10), omit "unless the proceeding is in relation to a guidance and appeals panel application".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(32) Schedule 3, item 170, page 132 (lines 29 and 30), omit "(other than a guidance and appeals panel application)".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(33) Schedule 3, item 178, page 134 (lines 10 to 31), omit the item, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">178 Subsections 182(2) and (3)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Repeal the subsections, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) However, if the President of the ART refers the application to the guidance and appeals panel under section 122 of the ART Act, section 31 (decision cannot be altered outside Tribunal process) of that Act applies to the decision after the referral is made.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(34) Schedule 3, item 182, page 135 (lines 20 and 21), omit the definition of <inline font-style="italic">guidance and appeals panel application</inline> in subclause 1(1) of Schedule 1.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(35) Schedule 3, item 184, page 136 (lines 12 and 13), omit the definition of <inline font-style="italic">guidance and appeals panel application</inline> in subsection 3(1).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(36) Schedule 3, items 190 and 191, page 137 (line 9) to page 138 (line 20), omit the items.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(37) Schedule 3, item 193, page 138 (lines 24 to 30), omit the item, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">193 Section 309 (paragraph beginning "If a person is dissatisfied with a decision of the AAT")</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Repeal the paragraph, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">If a person is dissatisfied with a decision of the ART on ART review, the person may apply to the ART for second review.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(38) Schedule 3, item 197, page 139 (lines 8 to 13), omit the item.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(39) Schedule 3, item 200, page 140 (lines 1 and 2), omit subsection 312(3).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(40) Schedule 3, item 201, page 140 (lines 8 and 9), omit "unless the proceeding is in relation to a guidance and appeals panel application".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(41) Schedule 3, item 201, page 140 (lines 13 and 14), omit "unless the proceeding is in relation to a guidance and appeals panel application".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(42) Schedule 3, item 202, page 141 (lines 5 to 26), omit the item, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">202 Subsection 315(2)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Repeal the subsection, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) However, if the President of the ART refers the application to the guidance and appeals panel under section 122 of the ART Act, section 31 (decision cannot be altered outside Tribunal process) of that Act applies to the decision after the referral is made.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(43) Schedule 3, item 209, page 146 (table item relating to paragraph 123(a)), omit the table item.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(44) Schedule 3, item 212, page 153 (table item relating to paragraph 95M(a)), omit the table item.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(45) Schedule 16, items 43 to 50, page 277 (line 6) to page 282 (line 20), omit the items, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">43 Definitions</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">In this Division:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">AAT second review</inline> has the same meaning as in the old law.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">ART social services decision</inline> has the meaning given by the new Act.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">second review</inline> has the meaning given by the new Act.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">44 No second review following AAT second review</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) This item applies if:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) a person applied for AAT second review of an ART social services decision under the old law; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the AAT second review has begun or has been completed.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) The person is not entitled to apply to the ART for second review in relation to the decision.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">SHEET UP104</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Clause 2, page 2 (after table item 2), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Clause 2, page 2 (table item 3, column 1), omit "items 1", substitute "items 2".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Clause 2, page 2 (after table item 4), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) Clause 2, page 2 (table item 5, column 1), omit "items 32", substitute "items 34".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) Clause 2, page 2 (after table item 5), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) Schedule 2, item 27, page 45 (lines 12 and 13), omit the item, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">27 Paragraph 109(3)(c)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Repeal the paragraph.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">27A Paragraph 109(3)(d)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Omit "under Part 5 or 7", substitute "by application under Part 5".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">27B At the end of section 109</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) Section 267 (decision-maker must have regard to rules when giving notice of decision) of the ART Act does not apply in relation to notifications given under subsection (3) of this section.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(7) Section 268 (requesting reasons for a reviewable decision from decision-maker) of the ART Act does not apply in relation to decisions to cancel a visa under this section.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(7) Schedule 2, page 48 (after line 12), after item 49, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">49A At the end of section 140N</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) If the regulations provide for notification by the Minister of the decision to take action under section 140M, then the following provisions of the ART Act do not apply to the decision:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) section 267 (decision-maker must have regard to rules when giving notice of decision);</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) section 268 (requesting reasons for a reviewable decision from decision-maker).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(8) Schedule 2, item 120, page 56 (line 35), omit paragraph 336P(2)(l), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(l) section 294 (legal or financial assistance), unless the review is of a decision referred to the guidance and appeals panel by the President of the ART under section 122 of the ART Act.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(9) Schedule 2, item 139, page 63 (lines 30 and 31), omit "under section 105 of the ART Act or section 349 of this Act", substitute "referred to in subsection (1A)".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(10) Schedule 2, page 64 (after line 2), after item 140, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">140A After subsection 351(1)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1A) For the purposes of subsection (1), the decisions are as follows:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) a decision under section 349 of this Act;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) a decision under section 368C of this Act;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) a decision under section 105 of the ART Act.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(11) Schedule 2, page 65 (after line 14), after item 149, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">149A Subsection 357A(1)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Omit "This Division is", substitute "The relevant provisions are".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">149B Subsection 357A(1)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Omit "it deals", substitute "they deal".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(12) Schedule 2, item 150, page 65 (lines 15 and 16), omit the item, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">150 Subsection 357A(2)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Repeal the subsection.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(13) Schedule 2, item 151, page 65 (line 19), omit "this Division", substitute "the relevant provisions".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(14) Schedule 2, item 151, page 65 (line 20), omit "this Division prevails", substitute "the relevant provisions prevail".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(15) Schedule 2, item 151, page 66 (lines 5 to 7), omit "this Division does not require the ART to observe any principle or rule of common law relating to the matters this Division deals", substitute "the relevant provisions do not require the ART to observe any principle or rule of common law relating to the matters the relevant provisions deal".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(16) Schedule 2, item 151, page 66 (after line 7), after subsection 357A(2C), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2D) In this section, the <inline font-style="italic">relevant provisions</inline> are:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) this Division; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) sections 374, 375, 375A and 376 and Division 7, in so far as they relate to this Division.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(17) Schedule 2, item 164, page 67 (line 20), after "the ART", insert "by the Department".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(18) Schedule 2, page 67 (after line 21), after item 164, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">164A After subsection 362A(1)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1A) If an applicant makes a request under subsection (1), the Department must provide the applicant with access to the material.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(19) Schedule 2, item 168, page 68 (line 5), omit "366D", substitute "366C".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(20) Schedule 2, page 68 (after line 6), after item 168, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">168A Section 366D</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Omit "Tribunal", substitute "ART".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(21) Schedule 2, item 174, page 74 (lines 16 to 18), omit section 373.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(22) Schedule 2, item 231, page 81 (lines 20 and 21), omit ", on the Tribunal's own initiative,".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(23) Schedule 2, item 237, page 82 (lines 21 and 22), omit paragraph 474AA(2)(b), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the ART does not have a duty to consider a request to refer a question of law at the request of a party to a proceeding.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(24) Schedule 2, item 237, page 82 (after line 22), after subsection 474AA(2), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2A) To avoid doubt, if the ART refers a question of law under section 185 of the ART Act, Division 6 of Part 7 of that Act applies in relation to the proceeding before the Federal Court in relation to the reference.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(25) Schedule 2, item 237, page 82 (line 23) to page 83 (line 2), omit subsections 474AA(3) and (4), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Subdivision A of Division 2 of Part 7 of the ART Act (appeals on questions of law) does not apply to a decision of the ART under section 185 of that Act (referring questions of law) in relation to proceedings for review of a reviewable migration decision or a reviewable protection decision.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(26) Schedule 2, item 247, page 84 (lines 23 and 24), omit the item, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">247 Subsection 476A(1) (note)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Repeal the note, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note: The Federal Court's jurisdiction referred to in paragraph (d) is limited: see section 474AA.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(27) Schedule 2, page 85 (after line 30), after item 253, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">253A Paragraph 494B(5)(d)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">After "Minister", insert "by the recipient".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(28) Schedule 2, item 257, page 86 (lines 11 to 13), omit the item.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(29) Schedule 2, item 259, page 86 (lines 16 to 25), omit the item.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(30) Schedule 2, item 269, page 87 (after line 24), after subsection 500(6CA), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6CB) A failure to comply with subsection (6C) in relation to an application does not affect the validity of the application.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(31) Schedule 3, page 105 (after line 25), after item 52, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">52A After subsection 161(1A)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Publishing reasons for ART decisions</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1B) Nothing in this Division prevents the ART from publishing in written or electronic form the reasons for a decision of the ART on ART review if the publication does not identify:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) a party to the review concerned (other than the Secretary or the Child Support Registrar); or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) a person (other than the Secretary or the Child Support Registrar) who is related to, or associated with, a party to the review concerned or is, or is alleged to be, in any other way concerned in the matter to which the review concerned relates; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) a witness in the review concerned.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1C) Without limiting subsection (1B), a publication of reasons for a decision of the ART is taken to identify a person if it contains any particulars of:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the name, title, pseudonym or alias of the person; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the address of any premises at which the person resides or works, or the locality in which any such premises are situated; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the physical description or the style of dress of the person; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) any employment or occupation engaged in, profession practised or calling pursued, by the person or any official or honorary position held by the person; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) the relationship of the person to identified relatives of the person or the association of the person with identified friends or identified business, official or professional acquaintances of the person; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(f) the recreational interests, or the political, philosophical or religious beliefs or interests, of the person; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(g) any real or personal property in which the person has an interest or with which the person is otherwise associated;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">and the particulars are sufficient to identify that person to a member of the public, or to a member of the section of the public to which the publication is disseminated, as the case requires.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(32) Schedule 3, page 118 (after line 23), after item 110, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">110A After subsection 126(1)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Publishing reasons for ART decisions</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1A) Nothing in this Division prevents the ART from publishing in written or electronic form the reasons for a decision of the ART on ART review if the publication does not identify:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) a party to the review concerned (other than the Secretary); or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) a person (other than the Secretary) who is related to, or associated with, a party to the review concerned or is, or is alleged to be, in any other way concerned in the matter to which the review concerned relates; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) a witness in the review concerned.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1B) Without limiting subsection (1A), a publication of reasons for a decision of the ART is taken to identify a person if it contains any particulars of:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the name, title, pseudonym or alias of the person; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the address of any premises at which the person resides or works, or the locality in which any such premises are situated; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the physical description or the style of dress of the person; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) any employment or occupation engaged in, profession practised or calling pursued, by the person or any official or honorary position held by the person; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) the relationship of the person to identified relatives of the person or the association of the person with identified friends or identified business, official or professional acquaintances of the person; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(f) the recreational interests, or the political, philosophical or religious beliefs or interests, of the person; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(g) any real or personal property in which the person has an interest or with which the person is otherwise associated;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">and the particulars are sufficient to identify that person to a member of the public, or to a member of the section of the public to which the publication is disseminated, as the case requires.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">No effect on operation of the Freedom of Information Act 1982</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(33) Schedule 3, item 165, page 129 (starting at line 15) omit the item, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">165 Section 147 (cell at table item 8, column headed "Provision of AAT Act")</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Repeal the cell, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(34) Schedule 3, item 166, page 129 (starting at line 18), omit the item, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">166 Section 147 (cell at table item 8, column headed "Application or modification of provision of AAT Act")</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Repeal the cell, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(35) Schedule 3, page 135 (after line 4), after item 180, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">180A After subsection 201(1)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Publishing reasons for ART decisions</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1A) Nothing in this Division prevents the ART from publishing in written or electronic form the reasons for a decision of the ART on ART review if the publication does not identify:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) a party to the review concerned (other than the Secretary); or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) a person (other than the Secretary) who is related to, or associated with, a party to the review concerned or is, or is alleged to be, in any other way concerned in the matter to which the review concerned relates; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) a witness in the review concerned.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1B) Without limiting subsection (1B), a publication of reasons for a decision of the ART is taken to identify a person if it contains any particulars of:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the name, title, pseudonym or alias of the person; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the address of any premises at which the person resides or works, or the locality in which any such premises are situated; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the physical description or the style of dress of the person; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) any employment or occupation engaged in, profession practised or calling pursued, by the person or any official or honorary position held by the person; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) the relationship of the person to identified relatives of the person or the association of the person with identified friends or identified business, official or professional acquaintances of the person; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(f) the recreational interests, or the political, philosophical or religious beliefs or interests, of the person; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(g) any real or personal property in which the person has an interest or with which the person is otherwise associated;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">and the particulars are sufficient to identify that person to a member of the public, or to a member of the section of the public to which the publication is disseminated, as the case requires.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(36) Schedule 3, page 141 (after line 26), after item 202, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">202A After section 315</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">315A Hearing of certain ART reviews in private</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) This section applies in relation to a proceeding for ART review if the ART is constituted for the purposes of the proceeding otherwise than by the guidance and appeals panel.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) The hearing of the proceeding must be in private.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) The ART may give directions, in writing or otherwise, as to the persons who may be present at the hearing of the proceeding.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) In giving directions, the ART must have regard to the wishes of the parties and the need to protect their privacy.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) Section 69 (hearings to be in public unless practice directions or ART order requires otherwise) of the ART Act does not apply in relation to the hearing of the proceeding.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(37) Schedule 3, Part 1, page 142 (after line 10), at the end of the Part, add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">207A Section 350</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Before "Nothing in", insert "(1)".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">207B At the end of section 350</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Publishing reasons for ART decisions</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Nothing in this Division prevents the ART from publishing in written or electronic form the reasons for a decision of the ART on ART review if the publication does not identify:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) a party to the review concerned (other than the Secretary); or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) a person (other than the Secretary) who is related to, or associated with, a party to the review concerned or is, or is alleged to be, in any other way concerned in the matter to which the review concerned relates; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) a witness in the review concerned.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Without limiting subsection (2), a publication of reasons for a decision of the ART is taken to identify a person if it contains any particulars of:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the name, title, pseudonym or alias of the person; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the address of any premises at which the person resides or works, or the locality in which any such premises are situated; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the physical description or the style of dress of the person; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) any employment or occupation engaged in, profession practised or calling pursued, by the person or any official or honorary position held by the person; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) the relationship of the person to identified relatives of the person or the association of the person with identified friends or identified business, official or professional acquaintances of the person; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(f) the recreational interests, or the political, philosophical or religious beliefs or interests, of the person; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(g) any real or personal property in which the person has an interest or with which the person is otherwise associated;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">and the particulars are sufficient to identify that person to a member of the public, or to a member of the section of the public to which the publication is disseminated, as the case requires.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(38) Schedule 4, item 66, page 179 (line 19), after "proceeding", insert "or Tribunal case event".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(39) Schedule 4, item 66, page 179 (line 21), after "proceeding", insert "or Tribunal case event".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(40) Schedule 4, page 180 (after line 4), after item 67, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">67A Subsection 61A(2)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Omit "AAT", substitute "Tribunal".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(41) Schedule 15, item 5, page 240 (after line 2), after paragraph 354(1AA)(c), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ca) paragraph 61(1A)(b);</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(42) Schedule 15, item 28, page 245 (line 3), omit "<inline font-style="italic">Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975</inline>", substitute "<inline font-style="italic">Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024</inline>".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(43) Schedule 15, item 28, page 245 (after line 15), after paragraph 176(1)(g), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ga) paragraph 61(1A)(b);</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(44) Schedule 15, item 36, page 247 (line 6), omit "167", substitute "176".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(45) Schedule 16, item 26, page 268 (line 4), omit "new Act", substitute "new law".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(46) Schedule 16, heading to Part 7, page 269 (line 1), at the end of the heading, add "and Chief Executive Officer and Principal Registrar".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(47) Schedule 16, item 28, page 269 (lines 7 to 11), omit paragraph (b), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) holds office as the President of the ART for the remainder of the term for which the person was appointed as President of the AAT.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(48) Schedule 16, item 29, page 269 (lines 17 to 21), omit paragraph (b), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) holds office as a Judicial Deputy President for the remainder of the term for which the person was appointed as Deputy President of the AAT.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(49) Schedule 16, Part 7, page 273 (after line 17), at the end of the Part, add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">33A Appointments to commence at or shortly after the transition time</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">AAT President to be consulted on member appointments before transition time</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Subitems (2) and (3) apply to any appointment of a person made in the exercise before the transition time of a power conferred by section 206, 207 or 208 of the new Act.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Paragraphs 206(2)(b), 207(2)(a) and 208(2)(a) of the new Act do not apply to the appointment of the person.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Before the Minister makes a recommendation to the Governor-General to appoint the person, the Minister must seek, and take into account, the advice of the President of the AAT in relation to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) whether the appointment would meet the operational needs of the Tribunal; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) unless the appointment is as a Judicial Deputy President—the financial capacity of the Tribunal for the appointment; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the effect of the appointment on the relative numbers of Judicial Deputy Presidents, Non-Judicial Deputy Presidents, senior members and general members.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Members assessed before the transition time</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) Paragraphs 207(2)(b) and 208(2)(b) of the new Act do not apply to the appointment of a person assessed as suitable for the appointment through a selection process that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) is conducted in accordance with the Guidelines for appointments to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) commences on or after 1 July 2023.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note: For appointment of non-judicial members, the Guidelines require public advertising of the position and an assessment, by a panel of persons, of candidates' suitability for the appointment against core selection criteria.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) Subitem (4) ceases to be in force 6 months after the transition time.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">AAT President's agreement required for appointment of Chief Executive Officer and Principal Registrar before transition time</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) Subitems (7) and (8) apply to any appointment of a person made in the exercise before the transition time of the power conferred by section 227 of the new Act.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(7) Paragraph 227(2)(c) of the new Act does not apply to the appointment of the person.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(8) Before the Minister makes a recommendation to the Governor-General to appoint the person, the Minister must obtain the agreement of the President of the AAT to the appointment.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Chief Executive Officer and Principal Registrar assessed before the transition time</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(9) Paragraph 227(2)(b) of the new Act does not apply to the appointment of a person assessed, by a panel of persons, as suitable for the appointment through a selection process that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) is merit-based; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) includes public advertising of the position; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) commences on or after 1 February 2024.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(10) Subitem (9) ceases to be in force 1 month after the transition time.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(50) Schedule 16, page 284 (after line 14), at the end of the Schedule, add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Part 10 — Consultation before transition time</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">52 Consultation in relation to rules before the transition time</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) This item applies to rules made in the exercise before the transition time of the power conferred by section 295 of the new Act.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Subsection 295(6) of the new Act does not apply to the making of the rules.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Before making rules that would affect the practice, procedure or operations of the Tribunal, the Minister must consult the President of the AAT.</para></quote>
<para>The government is moving amendments to the Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No.1) Bill 2023. The amendments flow from the amendments that I moved earlier to the Administrative Review Tribunal Bill, which were accepted by the House, and that bill has now passed.</para>
<para>Specifically, these amendments support the reinstatement of a second review process as a right for parties to review social services decisions where the two-tier review currently exists before the AAT. They make the necessary consequential changes to social security laws. These amendments also make a range of technical changes to clarify and improve the operation of the Administrative Review Tribunal.</para>
<para>I'll leave it there, given that I outlined the substantive content of these amendments earlier in this debate.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BATES</name>
    <name.id>300246</name.id>
    <electorate>Brisbane</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I have a couple of questions on this set of amendments. The first one is on accessibility. There has been significant concerns raised, as we mentioned in our second reading debate, about the accessibility of the tribunal, particularly for people who require translators. I have experiences in my own electorate of people having issues with acquiring translators and needing translators when they're accessing the AAT and numerous other government services. What steps are you taking to deliver on these concerns?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm very happy to answer the member for Brisbane's question. The legislation ensures that the tribunal is accessible. A priority of the reform is ensuring that the tribunal meets the needs of its users. The tribunal's objective would require that the tribunal provide an independent mechanism of review that is accessible and responsive to the diverse needs of parties. This reflects the fact that many tribunal users may require adjustments to participate meaningfully in tribunal processes.</para>
<para>The tribunal is also required to be accessible under clause 51. This applies as far as is practicable and requires the tribunal to consider the needs of parties. The president may make practice directions in relation to accessibility. There's a definition of 'accessible' in the AAR bill. The definition reads, 'Enables persons to apply to the tribunal and to participate effectively in proceedings in the tribunal'. I can assure honourable members that the department intends to engage with the tribunal and key stakeholders prior to implementation to ensure that accessibility remains a key focus.</para>
<para>I've had a personal long history of looking at this. Accessibility to public buildings is the subject of Australian standards. It's something that I think Australian government departments, instrumentalities and agencies have taken some time to come to. But increasingly public buildings, including premises occupied by the current Administrative Appeals Tribunal and premises to be occupied by the Administrative Review Tribunal, are physically accessible. As to the language needs or other needs of people with a disability, not just the current Administrative Appeals Tribunal and its successor, the Administrative Review Tribunal, but also courts and government departments generally are I think becoming increasingly aware of the need for government services for review processes like the ones the Administrative Review Tribunal will be delivering to indeed be accessible and properly responsive to the diverse needs of the whole of the Australian community.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WATSON-BROWN</name>
    <name.id>300127</name.id>
    <electorate>Ryan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In regard to the two-tier system, we understand that the government amendments seek to address concerns raised by stakeholders regarding the fact that the tier 1 system that is currently available for social security matters won't be preserved under the new ART. A number of my constituents have raised these concerns with me. Can you advise on how these amendments work to deliver a low-cost, accessible jurisdiction comparable to the tier 1 system?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>For the assistance of honourable members who are perhaps not familiar with the way review of social services decisions currently operates in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, we have the situation that most parties to a review of social services decisions—which include certain social security, family assistance, student assistance, paid parental leave and some child support decisions—have an automatic right to seek a second tribunal review of a decision after it has been reviewed by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for the first time. It's often referred to as tier 1 and tier 2.</para>
<para>The Administrative Review Tribunal Bill introduces improvements to the conduct of tribunal review of social services decisions so that the correct or preferable decision can be reached during the tribunal's first review, minimising the burden that seeking further review has on applicants. The settings for the reinstated second review for social security matters, which is the effect of the government's amendments, would be harmonised with other jurisdictional areas in the tribunal where possible and will broadly mirror existing settings for the second tier of review in current legislation. If a person is dissatisfied with a tribunal decision on a social services matter, they may seek a second review of that matter at the tribunal.</para>
<para>The improvements to the first review in the current bill would be retained. These settings would enable the tribunal to direct the decision-maker to participate in some proceedings where the tribunal deems it relevant and appropriate. It would ensure that matters can access dispute resolution and single-party case conferencing at the first review and would allow the tribunal to publish deidentified social services decisions to improve the transparency of tribunal decision-making while protecting the privacy of applicants. These improvements would assist the tribunal to make the correct or preferable decision at an earlier point of review while also keeping tribunal review of social services decisions inquisitorial, non-adversarial, informal, timely and accessible.</para>
<para>So, in essence, we are seeking to make improvements to the first tier. With these amendments we're going to preserve—because it seems to be the wish of the sector for the time being, because of the need for further reform in Services Australia—the possibility of a second tier of review. But there will be a very substantial improvements in the first tier.</para>
<para>It's notable that, if the ability of the tribunal to publish first-tier decisions had existed at the time of the robodebt scandal and disaster, it would have been possible for the Australian community to know, at a much earlier stage, about the unlawful decision-making that the former government engaged in. There were some 90 decisions made by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal in tier 1, not one of which was published, not one of which was appealed by government, and all of which made clear that the former government had engaged in unlawful conduct, and, because they didn't have to be published, the public were unaware of that scandal for a lot longer than should have been the case.</para>
<para>The second review for social security matters would replace the appeals function of the guidance and appeals panel that we're providing for, for the whole of the ART jurisdiction, where a party can seek a review of a tribunal decision on the basis that there may have been a material error, or the matter raises an issue of significance to the administrative decision-making. The president would retain a power to refer a matter, on their own initiative, to the guidance and appeals panel, at either the first or second review, on the basis that it raised a matter of significance to administrative decision-making. That will allow the guidance and appeals panel to exercise its function to review significant social security decisions while preserving the rights of applicants to access a second review with as little cost and formality as possible. So we have acceded to what advocates have sought, which is: for the time being, we're going to persist with the second tier—it's something that people are used to—but meshing it with what we hope are very much improved processes.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WATSON-BROWN</name>
    <name.id>300127</name.id>
    <electorate>Ryan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I have a related question, and I know that the Attorney-General referred to Services Australia. Noting that many of the issues currently experienced in the AAT are actually caused by Services Australia's poor engagement and communication processes, which often have really significant impact on individuals—and I do have constituents who have had this experience—what steps have actually been taken to ensure that this is resolved?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I can assure the member for Ryan that there's been a huge amount of work done by the Attorney-General's Department, by the expert panel headed by former justice of the High Court Patrick Keane, with affected departments. Obviously, one of those departments is the immigration part of the Department of Home Affairs, another is the Department of Social Services and yet another is Services Australia. There's obviously a tremendous interaction between the way in which the current tier 1 and tier 2 in the social security division of the current AAT interact with Services Australia. It's accepted by the government that there's a need for reform of processes at Services Australia. I would suggest to the House that the improvements that I've outlined in my previous answer to the member for Ryan—about very substantial changes being made to what is currently referred to as tier 1—will, if these amendments are accepted, continue to be a first stage or tier 1 of review. They will be very substantially improved. The second tier of review, that will continue to be available, will also operate with improved processes.</para>
<para>The new tribunal, the Administrative Review Tribunal, is going to be empowered, as I've made clear, to give directions—which, relevantly to the member for Ryan's question, will be directions to Services Australia—to participate, in a way which doesn't always occur now, and, further, to participate in ways that the tribunal regards as relevant and appropriate. So it won't be just left up to Services Australia to decide how it's going to participate. The tribunal will have a far more hands-on power of direction, but equally there will be alternative dispute resolution and single-party case conferencing that can all take place at the first review.</para>
<para>We are genuinely hoping, I can say in answer to the member for Ryan, for very substantial improvements in the review of social services decisions across the board. We are hoping that these changes at the administrative review level will in turn lead to improved decision-making across government, and that includes improved decision-making at Services Australia.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILKIE</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
    <electorate>Clark</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move the amendment circulated in my name:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Schedule 2, item 170, page 68 (lines 11 to 24), omit section 367A.</para></quote>
<para>This amendment simply removes section 367A from the Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Bill 2023, and the reason for this amendment is also simple: section 367A goes against the very principles of natural justice. Indeed, as drafted, section 367A would replace section 423A of the Migration Act, thereby maintaining a process which has always been unfair to refugees and asylum seekers. In essence, the provision would require the newly formed Administrative Review Tribunal to draw an unfavourable inference as to the credibility of the claim or evidence provided by an applicant if such information was not raised in the primary decision in circumstances where the tribunal is satisfied the applicant does not have a reasonable explanation for the delay. The provision only applies to applicants seeking a review of protection decisions, meaning it will create a disproportionate and unfair disadvantage to refugees and asylum seekers.</para>
<para>There are many reasons protection applicants might not include certain information within their original claims—for example, asylum seekers and refugees often face language barriers when completing applications, which is especially problematic when considering that applications must be completed in English. Moreover, with inadequate government funding for translation and interpreting services as well as limited availability for funding for legal services in this area of law it's unsurprising that some asylum seekers don't provide all relevant information in their original application. Hence, it might only be after an original application is refused that they seek legal advice and find that they should have included additional evidence. Yet, if the section is included in the bill, the tribunal may not be able to consider this additional information.</para>
<para>Furthermore, it is well established that people seeking asylum typically experience trauma both before and during their arrival in the country they are seeking protection from, and as the Refugee Advice and Casework Service explains in its submission to the Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs inquiry into this bill:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Studies have revealed that trauma, particularly of the kind experienced by people seeking asylum, often leads to memory loss or gaps, loss of concentration, impairment in cognitive function and the deterioration of mental health.</para></quote>
<para>The RACS goes on to note:</para>
<quote><para class="block">For some people seeking asylum, the need to cope with past traumas may lead to avoidance, suppressing memories, or dissociation when prompted to recount their experience of these traumatic events. This can explain why there may be a lack of detail, incoherence or gaps in an applicant's retelling of an event …</para></quote>
<para>Additionally, some asylum seekers may not include vital information in their initial application because of stigma, shame or a fear of authorities. For example, people seeking asylum because of their diverse sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression or sex characteristics may be hesitant to include such important information in their initial application for fear of retribution. Indeed, some asylum seekers come from countries where they can be imprisoned or even executed simply for being gay, so this hesitance is not surprising.</para>
<para>As you can see, there are a myriad of reasons why applicants may not have included vital information in their initial application, and, despite the fact that they may have a strong case for review, the way that section 367A is drafted has the potential to deny them access to protection and ultimately justice. Indeed, under subsection (2), unless the tribunal is satisfied there is a 'reasonable explanation' for the applicant's delay in providing the information or evidence, the tribunal is required to draw an unfavourable inference to the credibility of the claim. Here we come to the next problem, because reasonable explanation is not defined in the legislation. So, if an applicant were to rely on any of the examples I have spoken about, there is no guarantee that these valid explanations would be accepted by the tribunal. This is simply unconscionable and reflective of the way successive governments have continued to treat refugees and people seeking asylum appallingly in this country.</para>
<para>The removal of section 367A is supported by many leading organisations, including the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, the Law Council of Australia, the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre and the Refugee Advice and Casework Service. Experts in this area have made strong recommendations for the government to remove this provision from the legislation, and I echo these calls because every person, including those significantly vulnerable, such as refugees and asylum seekers, should have a right to justice in this country.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In response to the amendment from the member for Clark, I can say directly that the government does not support this amendment, which would remove the new clause 367A from the Migration Act.</para>
<para>The new section 367A replicates the effect of the existing section 423A of the Migration Act. It requires the tribunal to draw an adverse credibility inference if a protection visa review applicant raises a new claim in the tribunal without a reasonable explanation as to why the claim was not raised before the primary decision-maker. I will repeat that. It's important that it be understood that it doesn't prevent a protection visa review applicant from raising a new claim. What it does is require the tribunal to draw an adverse credibility inference if that new claim is raised without a reasonable explanation as to why it wasn't raised before the primary decision-maker.</para>
<para>The context for this is that it's relatively unusual for a new claim to be raised in this kind of proceeding. Bear in mind that, importantly, applicants are able to put forward an explanation as to why the claim hadn't been raised earlier or why the evidence wasn't presented earlier. The tribunal may choose to accept that explanation and not make the adverse inference.</para>
<para>The purpose of provisions like this is to contribute to the integrity of the onshore protection status determination process. Protection visa applicants are required, at the time that they apply for a visa, to make specific claims about why Australia's protection obligations are satisfied in their case. This section sets a clear expectation that protection applicants raise all claims and present all available evidence at the earliest possible stage. That's to ensure that the decision made by the primary decision-maker is as accurate as possible.</para>
<para>Of course there are going to be circumstances in which a late raised claim is explicable or late raised evidence is explicable. It'll be explanations such as, 'I couldn't find a witness,' 'I couldn't find a document' or 'I wasn't able to get the document.' That allowance is made in this provision.</para>
<para>Retaining section 367A reduces opportunities for exploitation of the migration system and supports expedient resolution of reviews and decisions. It does so in a way that preserves rights and recognises the degree of difficulty that, very often, applicants are faced with in getting their material together.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILKIE</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
    <electorate>Clark</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In that case it all seems to hinge on what the tribunal decides is a 'reasonable explanation'. Perhaps I could just quickly whizz through a few historic examples and at the end of these examples put to the Attorney-General the question, do any of these fall within the criteria for a reasonable explanation?</para>
<para>Mindy fled Nigeria having experienced serious gender based violence from her family. She was fearing harm as a member of the LGBTQI+ community. She was afraid to disclose her sexuality to the department because of stigma and a fear that her family or others in Nigeria might find out. It was only after obtaining legal assistance that she could articulate her claim and the reasons for delay in raising it. Ultimately she was recognised as a refugee.</para>
<para>Another example is Mariama, who fled Sierra Leone having experienced female genital mutilation. She did not raise it at the primary stage because she did not know it was relevant to her case because of how prevalent and normalised the practice is in Sierra Leone. Had she not had a lawyer, the presumption in the section could not have been exercised against her with what is a clear claim not considered, and her status as a refugee would not have been recognised.</para>
<para>Achiva, a divorced woman from Ethiopia, arrived in Australia having experienced physical and sexual violence from her former husband, and persecution for her political opinion. Due to trauma and cultural taboo, she was not able to disclose the violence she had experienced until she had established a relationship of trust with a lawyer, which took months. Without the lawyer, she would probably not have been able to raise her claims or articulate the reason she could not raise them earlier. Working through it with a lawyer, the presumption was able to be rebutted eventually.</para>
<para>Litiana fled Fiji having experienced severe gender based violence. She lodged an application raising these claims and it was rendered invalid. Her second application, made with the assistance of a support person, did not include these claims due to the support person's negligence. After she was denied an interview at the primary stage, the tribunal raised the presumption against her and required submissions post hearing, using significant resources. I can say that in this case a decision is pending.</para>
<para>Elnaz experienced physical and sexual family violence, including threats to kill and violence against her children from her husband, in both Iran and Australia over a period of years. She couldn't previously raise it because her application was joined with her husband's. Further, she was afraid her family in Australia would learn what happened to her and she feared her community's judgement of her if she disclosed the violence in her relationship. But, with the assistance of a lawyer, Elnaz was able to rebut the presumption, leading to her recognition as a refugee.</para>
<para>Finally, there is the example of Mubashir—these are not their real names—fled Pakistan fearing harm from the Taliban. He did not disclose at the primary stage that he had been targeted by military intelligence, as he feared that information would be shared with authorities and he feared severe consequences.</para>
<para>In other words, there are any number of applicants for protection, who, for very good and very legitimate reasons, were not able to, or did not think to, provide a full and detailed explanation of their circumstances. Surely, in all those cases the presumption should not have applied and they should have been allowed to add information subsequently—for example, after they had been able to trust a lawyer or after they were made aware of the scope of our laws and in what circumstances protection might be applied. So I am concerned that the section remains and that, if it is going to remain, that it remains ill-defined as to in what circumstances the tribunal will be able to accept additional information.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Very briefly, the examples that were given just then by the member for Clark—with the greatest of respect to him—simply prove that there is a discretion currently, that there has been a discretion, and that late raised material is capable of being accepted without the tribunal choosing to draw an unfavourable inference to the credibility of the claim in those matters. I'm indebted in a way to the member for Clark for bringing forward those examples, because what we have here with the proposed new clause 367A from the Migration Act would replicate the effect of the existing section 423A of the Migration Act, that being the provision under which all of the examples that the member for Clark referred to were made.</para>
<para>No-one doubts the degree of difficulty or the degree of pain and suffering that has been experienced by very many applicants for protection status in Australia or the cultural barriers that exist that might indeed provide a reason why certain evidence wasn't brought forward at the earliest possible stage. No-one doubts the difficulty of obtaining appropriate legal advice, which sometimes means that unrepresented applicants at an earlier stage don't put their cases as well as they might, and that with the assistance of a lawyer they were enabled to put their cases better. The current tribunal, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, applying the current section 423A of the Migration Act, has proved itself able in the past to see those difficulties, to make appropriate decisions, to recognise that there were reasons why late raised material hadn't been raised earlier. I certainly haven't seen here in the examples put forward by the member for Clark, with respect, a reason for not continuing with the new proposed section 367A of the Migration Act, which, as I said, preserves appropriate discretion in the tribunal to receive late raised evidence.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILKIE</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
    <electorate>Clark</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the Attorney-General for that explanation. This all seems to hinge on what is the definition of 'reasonable explanation'. I think we could bring clarity to this matter right now if the Attorney-General could read into the record his or the government's understanding of 'reasonable explanation'?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Clark for his suggestion, but I won't do that. I'm not seeking to fetter the future Administrative Review Tribunal with whatever thoughts I might have on the infinite variety of circumstances that can occur in protection applications and review of protection decisions. It's simply not possible to do so. That's why we use in legislation phrases like 'reasonable explanation'. That's why we preserve discretions in administrative decision-makers so they can tailor their decisions to the particular circumstances that arise in the particular case. There is always a degree of difficulty in the minister, or me in debate, seeking to set out an exhaustive list of what I think might constitute a reasonable explanation, let alone attempting to do so in the legislation itself. There's got to be some scope for discretion, some scope for administrative decision-makers to match their decision-making to the particular circumstances and the infinite variety of human life that comes before them.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILKIE</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
    <electorate>Clark</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Finally, briefly, I will take this opportunity to acknowledge the many people right around the country who do come to the assistance of asylum seekers to allow them to work their way through the processes that we're discussing and in the case studies that I've given. I would particularly like to single out my friends at the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre, who, along with countless lawyers and other people around the country, have worked tirelessly to take hold of an asylum seeker and understand their circumstances and help them make that application, particularly when the application is complex and there is a need ultimately to provide that additional information and to achieve the protection they seek.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question before the House is that the amendment moved by the honourable member for Clark be agreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [11:48] <br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick) </p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>14</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Bandt, A. P.</name>
                  <name>Bates, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Chandler-Mather, M.</name>
                  <name>Daniel, Z.</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                  <name>Le, D.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, M. M.</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                  <name>Sharkie, R. C. C.</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z.</name>
                  <name>Tink, K. J. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                  <name>Wilkie, A. D. (Teller)</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>48</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Ananda-Rajah, M.</name>
                  <name>Belyea, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Charlton, A. H. G.</name>
                  <name>Chesters, L. M.</name>
                  <name>Claydon, S. C.</name>
                  <name>Coker, E. A.</name>
                  <name>Doyle, M. J. J.</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Fernando, C.</name>
                  <name>Freelander, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Garland, C. M. L.</name>
                  <name>Giles, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P.</name>
                  <name>Hill, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Kearney, G. M.</name>
                  <name>Khalil, P.</name>
                  <name>Lawrence, T. N.</name>
                  <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                  <name>Leigh, A. K.</name>
                  <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                  <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                  <name>McIntosh, M. I.</name>
                  <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, B. K.</name>
                  <name>Mulino, D.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>Payne, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Perrett, G. D.</name>
                  <name>Phillips, F. E.</name>
                  <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                  <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Rishworth, A. L.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Thistlethwaite, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Vamvakinou, M.</name>
                  <name>Ware, J. L.</name>
                  <name>Watts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Wells, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, J. H.</name>
                  <name>Zappia, A.</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><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms DANIEL</name>
    <name.id>008CH</name.id>
    <electorate>Goldstein</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move amendment (3) as circulated in my name:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Schedule 2, item 160, page 67 (lines 1 to 6), omit the item.</para></quote>
<para>This amendment is not dissimilar in theme or tone to the previous amendment from the member for Clark or the amendment moved by the member for North Sydney. However, this amendment goes to information that is required or not required to be given to an applicant for comment.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms DANIEL</name>
    <name.id>008CH</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I did move the amendment. Thank you for the advice, Attorney-General. I did move the amendment as circulated in my name.</para>
<para>This amendment goes to the issue that, under this legislation, the ART is not required to notify the applicant of information that it intends to rely on to affirm the decision under review if this information is included in the original decision. Arguably, this is a significant departure from procedural fairness requirements where the tribunal is required to notify applicants of adverse information in the decision under review which it intends to rely on. As written, the legislation will permit the ART to refuse an application based on material mentioned in the applicant's department decision, even where this material wasn't relied on by the department in making its decision, without providing any notice to the applicant that it intends to rely on this material in a different manner to the department.</para>
<para>There are several issues with this. One is the potentially unjust outcome for applicants who will be denied an opportunity to comment on that adverse information before a tribunal decision is made. Also, it forces applicants into a position where they will have to address every single issue in their department decision without knowing which bit of that decision is or is not being relied on to make an adverse decision. This will mean more lengthy submissions, voluminous materials to the tribunal, and potentially higher legal fees for the preparation of these materials. So there's potentially an inefficiency factor for the tribunal.</para>
<para>By way of case study—and I am in part, like the previous speakers, relying on advice from the ASRC, which has done amazing work in providing examples and case studies of people who have been affected by these sorts of rules—this case study goes to Jibrail, a Hazara man from Afghanistan, who sought asylum in Australia and applied for a protection visa but was refused one by the Department of Home Affairs. Jibrail sought a review of his department decision. As the department accepted he couldn't return to his hometown or Mazar-i-Sharif, Jibrail focused his submissions to the tribunal on why he could not return to Kabul. The tribunal then notified Jibrail that it considered he could safely return to Mazar-i-Sharif, and Jibrail had an opportunity to address this matter before the tribunal. If the subsection as written in this new iteration of the legislation had been in place, arguably Jibrail would have been denied the opportunity to respond to the adverse information the tribunal intended to rely on regarding relocation to Mazar-i-Sharif as the matter was considered in the department decision, even though the department reached a different finding.</para>
<para>The issue I'm trying to get to here is that these are life-and-death decisions for people. I know that the Attorney-General understands that, and that that's the whole point of what we're trying to do here, but the crux of the matter is that these are some of the most vulnerable people in our community who are facing immense pressure, immense anxiety, financial issues, language issues and a whole range of barriers as they work through these processes. These issues of procedural fairness are really critical, and we need to get this right.</para>
<para>I will finish by saying that, in conversations with the Attorney-General, he has made the point about not wanting to overlegislate in order to give the tribunal the flexibility to do its job. I hear that completely. But we also don't want to underlegislate when what we're trying to do is protect due process for some of the most vulnerable people who interact with the system.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The government does not support these amendments. I thank the member for Goldstein for withdrawing her earlier amendment because of the interaction with the government amendments. On this amendment, with respect to the member for Goldstein and those who provided her with the example she gave, there seems to be some misconception about what these new paragraphs, 359A(4)(d) and (e), of the Migration Act will do. What they do is clarify that the tribunal is not required to give to the applicant information that was included or referred to in the written statement of the decision that's under review or that's prescribed by the regulations. Because the written statement of the decision is the primary document that is relevant to the decision under review, applicants will already be aware of the contents of the written statement. They will have the opportunity to respond to any of that information during the review process, particularly at the hearing. It's not actually necessary for the tribunal to separately draw this to an applicant's attention. Very importantly, proposed section 359A does not prevent the tribunal member from putting information to an applicant if they consider it necessary and conducive to the review process.</para>
<para>The government and I accept the vulnerability of many applicants in migration review processes, but, as far as possible, I can assure the member for Goldstein that, contrary to her suggestion to the House that this might lead to longer decisions or hearings, or her suggestion that applicants were somehow being denied the right to put submissions, that is not what this provision deals with.</para>
<para>This provision is a very narrow procedural provision. It relieves the tribunal from any obligation to give information to the applicant that's already included or referred to in the written statement of the decision. This narrow procedural provision won't lead to longer decisions. It won't lead to longer hearings. It won't deny applicants the right to put submissions on any matter that they believe is relevant to their situation. It's a very narrow procedural provision, and I would suggest to the House that it is likely to improve the way in which the decision-making process takes place in the tribunal.</para>
<para>Question negatived.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LE</name>
    <name.id>295676</name.id>
    <electorate>Fowler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move my amendment:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Schedule 2, item 171, page 69 (line 15), at the end of subsection 368(1), add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">; and (e) inform the applicant, where possible, of any further steps needed to be taken by the applicant in order to have their matter finalised.</para></quote>
<para>As we've heard this morning from the member for North Sydney, the government's Administrative Review Tribunal Bill is actually a great improvement on the previous Administrative Appeals Tribunal legislation. I have previously shared the experience of my constituents' woes with the AAT. There are recurring issues that derive from their experiences where they've struggled with accessibility due to language barriers, cost and the stress of waiting for correspondence without knowing if they would get a favourable outcome or not.</para>
<para>The introduction of the ART is an expensive exercise and it must be done right. In considering the experience of my constituents, my proposal for this amendment is to address the lack of notification. We often get constituents coming to our office and English is their second language, as the member for Brisbane initially mentioned. The AAT deals a lot with people from non-English-speaking backgrounds, and in my electorate of Fowler, where 70 per cent of the population have a parent or two parents born overseas, English is often a second language. Therefore, in seeking this amendment, I'm really just asking the government to consider that people need to know and to be informed about what's happening with the decision so that they can actually plan ahead. This is about procedural fairness and, basically, giving people the opportunity to plan to know what to do, and communication, as we know, is very important.</para>
<para>The ART, the new executive body, is a big beast, and I appreciate the cases that the ART will face and will have to consider. But I think it's a matter of fair process to just inform the review applicant of what they have to do and what they need to present to the AAT. We've been talking about the review process this morning. We've been talking about decisions being made, but are those decisions and review processes being given to clients, in particular to people of non-English-speaking backgrounds? We make legislation in this House all the time, and the legislation we make is in English and predominantly, if not 100 per cent of the time, aimed towards people whose first language is English. My hope is that the ART, as we progress to implement this legislation, will ensure that the tribunal is cognisant of the needs of multicultural communities and of those who are fronting the ART. Often, when you go into these institutions, there's a lot of stress and there are a lot of fears, because language is such a big barrier. Not being informed about what's happening with their case then adds to further stress.</para>
<para>As I said, there have been so many cases of people coming to see me at my office not knowing what the AAT's position is. They have not heard from the AAT. They've been waiting for years—12 months, two years or three years—without a simple notification of what's required of them or even a notification saying: 'You've been rejected. The case is concluded.' I really don't think a simple notification is too much to ask the tribunal to include in their decision.</para>
<para>I know that the minister will stand up and reject this amendment, but I really urge the government to consider our multicultural communities in making legislation, and such important legislation as the ART, especially in the reviewing process. Thank you.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Fowler's amendment would alter section 368 of the Migration Act so as to require the tribunal's notice of decisions and statement of reasons to clearly outline 'next steps and action required' for applicants.</para>
<para>I can say directly that the government does not support the proposed amendment but not because we don't share entirely the objectives of the member for Fowler in making the processes of the Administrative Review Tribunal and administrative decision-making in respect of Migration Act matters as accessible, clear and available to applicants as they can possibly be.</para>
<para>We accept entirely the observations of the member for Fowler about the difficulty that is faced by many applicants, created by cultural and language barriers in their lives, to accessing the processes of the tribunal. It's for that reason that the provisions of the Administrative Review Tribunal Bill and the consequential bill that is now before the House require that applicants be given written notice when a tribunal case event is scheduled or where the tribunal has given a direction for something to be done. That requirement is already there in the legislation as proposed. This ensures that applicants understand what they're required to do and the time frames for doing so.</para>
<para>The particular section of the Migration Act to which the member for Fowler's amendment would attach is section 368. It applies to the tribunal's final decision in a migration or protection matter—that is, not procedural decisions and not directions in running but the decision whether to affirm, overturn or remit the original decision-maker's decision.</para>
<para>Section 368 of the Migration Act modifies section 111 of the Administrative Review Tribunal Bill to require that tribunal decisions provide additional information for reviewable migration and protection decisions. In particular, the decision must include the time and the date of the decision, which are essential to meet the need for certainty here. I referred to that need for certainty earlier in this debate about Migration Act processes. It's essential to meet the need for certainty about when a decision on a review of these decisions is final.</para>
<para>I can assure the member for Fowler that, in the government's view, not only does the legislation already require that there be clarity given to applicants and that applicants have the effect of a decision absolutely clearly spelled out for them, as well as the time and the date of a decision, but the government intends to work with the new tribunal over coming months to ensure that all communications with all parties to a review are clear, are accessible and are comprehensive.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that the amendment moved by the honourable member for Fowler be agreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [12:14]<br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>14</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Bandt, A. P.</name>
                  <name>Bates, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Chandler-Mather, M.</name>
                  <name>Daniel, Z.</name>
                  <name>Gee, A. R.</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                  <name>Le, D. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Ryan, M. M.</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                  <name>Sharkie, R. C. C.</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z.</name>
                  <name>Tink, K. J. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                  <name>Wilkie, A. D.</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>43</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Ananda-Rajah, M.</name>
                  <name>Belyea, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Charlton, A. H. G.</name>
                  <name>Coker, E. A.</name>
                  <name>Conroy, P. M.</name>
                  <name>Doyle, M. J. J.</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Fernando, C.</name>
                  <name>Garland, C. M. L.</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                  <name>Giles, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P.</name>
                  <name>Gosling, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Kearney, G. M.</name>
                  <name>Khalil, P.</name>
                  <name>Lawrence, T. N.</name>
                  <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                  <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                  <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                  <name>McCormack, M. F.</name>
                  <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, B. K.</name>
                  <name>Mulino, D.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, L. S.</name>
                  <name>Payne, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Perrett, G. D.</name>
                  <name>Phillips, F. E.</name>
                  <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                  <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Swanson, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Vamvakinou, M.</name>
                  <name>Zappia, A.</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.<br />Bill, as amended, agreed to.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Third Reading</title>
            <page.no>46</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a third time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a third time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>MOTIONS</title>
        <page.no>46</page.no>
        <type>MOTIONS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Pensions and Benefits</title>
          <page.no>46</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TINK</name>
    <name.id>300124</name.id>
    <electorate>North Sydney</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I seek leave to move the following motion:</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 routine CPI indexation that took effect yesterday will increase Jobseeker payments by just 96 cents per day, and other income support payments including Disability Support Pension and Carer Payment by similarly nominal amounts;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) indexation will lift the Jobseeker payment to just $55 a day (including the energy supplement), which equates to less than half the minimum wage full-time;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) this increase is insufficient to prevent the widespread distress experienced by income support recipients due to inadequate payments alongside rising prices and rent; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) the Government's media release, announcing these changes, titled 'indexation puts more in the pockets of millions of Australians', does not acknowledge that income support payments are not enough to cover the cost of essential goods and services including housing, food and energy; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) calls on the Government to significantly increase income support payments, beyond indexation, in the upcoming May budget.</para></quote>
<para>Leave not granted.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TINK</name>
    <name.id>300124</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the member for North Sydney from moving the following motion:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the routine CPI indexation that took effect yesterday will increase Jobseeker payments by just 96 cents per day, and other income support payments including Disability Support Pension and Carer Payment by similarly nominal amounts;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) indexation will lift the Jobseeker payment to just $55 a day (including the energy supplement), which equates to less than half the minimum wage full-time;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) this increase is insufficient to prevent the widespread distress experienced by income support recipients due to inadequate payments alongside rising prices and rent; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) the Government's media release, announcing these changes, titled 'indexation puts more in the pockets of millions of Australians', does not acknowledge that income support payments are not enough to cover the cost of essential goods and services including housing, food and energy; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) calls on the Government to significantly increase income support payments, beyond indexation, in the upcoming May budget.</para></quote>
<para>With the latest data telling us that one in eight Australians are currently living below the poverty line, it's time this parliament prioritised a debate about the woefully inadequate income support system that we now have in this country. The fact that most people relying on unemployment and parenting payments in Australia are being forced to choose which everyday essentials they will give up, just to survive, is something that should be of the highest concern to this parliament and this government. Ultimately, urgent agent is required to increase income support payments so that recipients can afford the basics and be lifted out of poverty. And the government has a very real opportunity to do this in the upcoming federal budget.</para>
<para>The truth is: despite recent media reports, this dire situation will not be significantly addressed by yesterday's routine indexation, which saw some payments increase by just 96c per day. More than 3.3 million Australians are currently living in poverty. That is more than the populations of South Australia, Tasmania, the ACT and the Northern Territory combined. Sole parent families, women and people with disability are all experiencing poverty at above average levels. The system that should be helping these people to get through tough times and supporting them to find suitable employment is broken.</para>
<para>Surely, as a parliament, we should be able to agree that the income support payment should be enough to cover the basics—food, rent, energy and medicines—so that people can focus on getting on with their lives, be that as parents or as employees once they find jobs. For young Australians, this payment should be enough for them to study and find employment without worrying about where their next meal will come from or how they're going to pay the rent. But these payments remain totally inadequate to cover the essentials.</para>
<para>The Australian Council of Social Services' latest survey of people receiving JobSeeker payments, youth allowance, parenting payment, Austudy, Abstudy, or a special benefit found that nine in 10 people renting privately are in rental stress, which means that they're paying more than 30 per cent of their income on rent. Seven in 10 are eating less or skipping meals. Seven in 10 are cutting back on heating or cooling for their homes. Three out of five experience difficulty affording their medicines or medical care. Ninety-eight per cent said that the low rate of income support harmed their mental health, while 93 per cent said it harmed their physical health.</para>
<para>This is an appalling situation. And we, in this place, should be ashamed. Every day that this parliament fails to increase welfare payments is another day that people on welfare struggle to keep a roof over their heads, skip a meal or suffer mental and physical distress.</para>
<para>Many people with courage have shared with me their personal experiences of living on income support, and I want to thank them for doing so. I now want to share some of these stories with you, so this place can hear the experience of those living on income support in their own words.</para>
<para>One person receiving JobSeeker said: 'After several years off work to care for my parents, I've not been able to return to the workforce. I have been actively applying for employment since 2017 and have literally applied for hundreds of jobs and have not been successful. Meanwhile, the gap in my employment record has widened, and employers are now discriminating against me for it. I am now 59 years of age, single, with no super. And, due to the ongoing financial stress, I suffer from mental health issues, along with physical health issues, the result of years of unemployment, stress and poverty. I don't have family or friends to lean on for support, and I'm quite isolated and alone.' Separately, someone on Austudy actually said that they were 'staring down the road of homelessness with each lease renewal or rent hike,' while another receiving JobSeeker said: 'Relying on income support makes you depressed and anxious and gives you panic attacks. It adversely affects your overall physical health and confidence. You feel less of a person. You feel like you don't belong—like an outcast.' Hearing these stories is truly heartbreaking, and I believe it is our job, the job of the people in this place, to say: 'You do belong.'</para>
<para>More than that, this parliament—this government—has a very real opportunity to show the more than one million people who are relying on these payments that they belong by significantly increasing income support payments in the upcoming budget. Routine indexation, while better than nothing, simply doesn't cut it. This week JobSeeker payments increased, because of indexation, by just 96c. That isn't even enough to buy the reusable shopping bag, let alone the groceries to put in it—96c a day. It won't help with the rent, it won't make a dent in the energy bills and it certainly won't buy a bottle of water, let alone a meal.</para>
<para>For this reason, I think the government's media release announcing this indexation, titled 'Indexation puts more in the pockets of millions of Australians' and boasting that it boosts payments, is insulting to the more than one million Australians who are struggling to live on these inadequate support payments. People are systematically being left behind. Young people who are trying to kickstart their working life are being left behind, with students struggling to pay for essentials while trying to complete their degrees. In fact, those on youth allowance experience the deepest poverty. And women are being left behind, particularly single mothers and older women. People with a disability are being left behind. The situation is worsened by a cost-of-living crisis that is not easing. Inflation may have slowed, but that doesn't mean costs are coming down; they are merely rising less quickly than in previous months. Many of the costs that rose faster than inflation were for essential goods and services, things that households cannot avoid spending on even when the prices increase faster than their wages.</para>
<para>Over the 12 months to the December 2023 quarter the CPI rose by 4.1 per cent. That's indexation. But the price of food and non-alcoholic beverages rose by 4.5 per cent, housing costs rose by 6.1 per cent, electricity prices rose by 6.9 per cent and health costs rose by eight per cent. Under that scenario, regular indexation can clearly be seen to be inadequate. An urgent boost to welfare payments is needed.</para>
<para>The OECD has recommended that Australia lift unemployment payments, highlighting that they remain amongst the lowest in the OECD and are well below the poverty line. Last year the Economic Inclusion Advisory Committee report found that JobSeeker payments are inadequate against all benchmarks and recommended substantially increasing the payment, potentially to 90 per cent of the value of the age pension, as the most effective way to tackle poverty. Today the Australian Council of Social Service has called for social security payments to be increased to 100 per cent of the age pension. But it should be noted that the age pension itself does not provide a comfortable standard of living, and I am frequently contacted by members of my community sharing with me their struggles in trying to get by on the age pension. It's just not good enough. While increasing all social services payments to the same rate as the age pension might be a starting point—and it will lift millions out of poverty—it's by no means the entire solution. I acknowledge that the government did increase payments in the May budget last year. But it did so by only $20 a week. That's $4 a working day. It's not a coffee. It's well below the increase called for by the Economic Inclusion Advisory Committee, the Australian Council of Social Service, those with lived experience and many others.</para>
<para>Ultimately this piecemeal approach of small increases and routine indexation is not addressing this national crisis with anywhere near the urgency that we should adopt as a parliament. The upcoming May budget provides us with an opportunity to fix this. While we may continue to debate what income we should be generating as a government through reforms like an adjustment of the PRRT or changes in individual tax circumstances, ultimately it's beyond belief that in a country as wealthy as Australia those 3.3 million people continue to live in poverty. I call on this government, I call on this parliament, to urgently act to end poverty in Australia. We can begin by delivering a substantial increase in income support payments in the upcoming budget.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>230531</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILKIE</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
    <electorate>Clark</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion moved by the member for North Sydney and commend the member for bringing this to the attention of the House. The member for North Sydney is absolutely correct that there is an urgent need to deal with this matter. I also agree with the member regarding the government's claim that the regular CPI adjustment of government pensions and payments is somehow a discretionary decision of the government. Frankly, it's treating the community like mugs and it is diminishing the government. We all know that the CPI adjustment of government pensions and payments is automatic. It will happen no matter who is the government. It's happened in the past. It's happening this week. It'll happen in the future. What the government should be focusing on is not claiming credit for the status quo but what it can do to change the status quo to ensure that the fabulous wealth of this country is spent in such a way that everyone in this country can live a dignified, healthy life.</para>
<para>We really have to turn our mind to the amount of money that is paid by Centrelink in government pensions and payments. It is clearly inadequate. We focus a lot on JobSeeker or unemployment benefits, as we should, but sometimes we focus on that at the expense of talking about other payments, like the age pension and the disability pension, which come straight to mind, because they are all fundamentally inadequate. Imagine being a single age pensioner paying market rent in any capital city in Australia—in particular in my home town of Hobart, which is the second least affordable capital city in the country. You can't pay $400 or $500 a week for your rent and then have anything at all left for your food, your power, your clothes, a little bit of entertainment, some travel and so on.</para>
<para>Just bear with me, because there are going to be some facts and figures here demonstrating this. The recent ACOSS report that the member for North Sydney has referred to, which was done in conjunction with the University of New South Wales, found that 60 per cent of people on the JobSeeker payment live in poverty, that 72 per cent of people on the parenting payment live in poverty, that 43 per cent of people on the disability support pension live in poverty and that 34 per cent of people on youth allowance live in poverty. This is just absolutely shameful. We're one of the richest countries on the planet. In fact, according to the most recent UBS survey of global wealth, median per capita wealth in Australia is second only to that of Belgium. There is no shortage of money. This financial year, the federal government's going to spend—wait for it—two-thirds of a trillion dollars. I'd better say that again to get our heads around that: this financial year, the federal government's going to spend, approximately, in the order of two-thirds of a trillion dollars. Yet we have people sleeping on the streets, people waiting years for surgery, people going without food and people going without medicine. Not only is this unacceptable; it's entirely avoidable.</para>
<para>It's all about our priorities as a nation. Surely one of the first ways in which we should think of spending our fabulous wealth is to ensure that every person, including older Australians, people with a disability and people who are unemployed—the most disadvantaged and vulnerable people—has enough income support to live a healthy, happy, dignified life. They should have a roof over their head. They should have enough money in their income support payments to pay the rent. If that means increasing Commonwealth rent assistance, let's do it. Let's spend a little bit of that two-thirds of a trillion dollars differently so that we don't have this shocking gap between the advantaged and the disadvantaged in this country, a gap that is getting wider and wider. For those of us who are lucky enough to own a house, we and our kids will be fine, but for the people who aren't as fortunate as us, the people who are living on government income support, let's spend some of that money so that they can live much better. It's all about priorities.</para>
<para>By the way, this isn't just the members for North Sydney and Clark having a spray. What we're talking about is supported by ACOSS, by the unions, by the Business Council, by the Australian Investment Council and by Deloitte, of all people. Everyone thinks we should do it. It's just a case of the government getting its priorities right.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs ELLIOT</name>
    <name.id>DZW</name.id>
    <electorate>Richmond</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The government won't be supporting the suspension motion moved by the member for North Sydney. We as a government certainly acknowledge that people are doing it tough, and that has been at the centre of all of our actions since we were elected to government. We absolutely understand the challenges people are facing. Our budget and our constant measures to address cost-of-living pressures, and our recent announcement of the tax cuts as well, show that we understand and know people are doing it tough, and that we are absolutely committed to providing support that people require. Those tax cuts from 1 July for every Australian taxpayer are vitally important, and they are on top of our cost-of-living measures which we have announced.</para>
<para>Many of the issues that have been brought up are in relation to some of the pensions. On 20 September 2023 we increased those base rates of working age and student payments, including the JobSeeker payment, youth allowance, the parenting payment, Austudy, the Abstudy living allowance and the disability support pension. They increased by $40 a fortnight to benefit over a million Australians. This is an issue we on this side of the House feel very strongly about, and many people have campaigned for a very long time in relation to increasing those payments—and that was a major commitment we made, as we understood how important it is to take that action.</para>
<para>Along with the basic rate of payment, everyone who receives the JobSeeker payment is eligible for at least another additional supplementary payment which could include the energy supplement, the family tax benefit or rent assistance. Depending on a person's circumstances, there are other supplementary benefits as well. In recognition of the cost associated with raising a family, a higher basic rate is payable to recipients with dependent children and principal carer parents. Income support payments such as JobSeeker are indexed in March and September in line with CPI, and I will detail that a bit more later on.</para>
<para>As a government, we are always committed to helping those most in need. That has been obvious from day one of this government. After 10 years of neglect we have committed a huge amount in terms of providing support that people need. We do that because it was the Labor Party that built the modern safety net. We built universal Medicare, universal superannuation, universal NDIS and the minimum wage. We will always work to ensure all Australians are supported and no-one is left behind. We understand how important that is. We know the cost-of-living pressures, and that's why we're taking all actions possible to make life easier for all Australians.</para>
<para>In our cost-of-living package in the budget, there was a whole range of measures; I've outlined some of those increases already. They include expanding the eligibility for parenting payments single to parents with a youngest child under 14, and, very importantly, increasing the maximum rates of Commonwealth rent assistance by 15 per cent—the largest increase in more than 30 years. All that additional support has started flowing. And from yesterday around five million people are receiving a boost to their payments as a result of that indexation. Indexation is absolutely important to make sure we see those increases.</para>
<para>On top of that—that increase in payments is just one element of this—we have a whole suite of measures addressing cost-of-living concerns. We have energy bill relief, cheaper medicines, cheaper child care, lifting the Medicare levy low-income thresholds, tripling the bulk-billing incentive, expanding eligibility for the Commonwealth seniors health care card, freezing social security deeming rates, expanding paid parental leave and—as I said at the very beginning—delivering bigger and better tax cuts for working Australians. We understand how tough people are doing it. That is a tax cut for every Australian taxpayer.</para>
<para>We also have a massive investment in social and affordable housing, with our $10 billion package and a whole range of measures to make sure that social and affordable housing can be accessed by the most vulnerable in our community. As I said before, the JobSeeker payment increased yesterday as well with indexation, and we saw that increase with lots of other pensions as well. It means that, since the government was elected, the rate of JobSeeker has increased by $120 a fortnight, or 18.7 per cent, providing over $3,100 in additional support each year. From yesterday, 20 March 2024, the higher rate of JobSeeker is $816.90 per fortnight. We understand people are still doing it tough on that, but we increased it because we know it's vitally important to do that. There is that full range of the packages I have suggested and talked about here today.</para>
<para>We are also absolutely committed to making sure that we are providing the resources and training and support that people need to get into the workforce. We know that so many of these people want to do that. Part of that is our fee-free TAFE, and that has been a huge success—I hear every day from people who had not been able to access training to get into jobs. So, whilst we have to provide all of that support through our safety nets, which we are doing, as well as through cost-of-living relief and tax cuts, we also have a strong focus on ensuring that people are able to access training and get into employment, because secure work, as we know, is one of the strongest forces for reducing poverty. We know that. That's our priority: to get people into work.</para>
<para>The current state of the labour market is a success story. Just today the unemployment rate is at 3.7 per cent. It is at a historic low. Since May 2022, around 650,000 jobs have been created, and workforce participation is at a historic high. We know we have to make sure we are investing in training and education as well as providing all of those necessary supports. As I said, that absolutely is a hallmark of Labor governments and all that we have built in terms of providing those social security safety nets. We have to do this, and we have done all of this, in a fiscally responsible manner as well, in terms of having a surplus while providing all of these necessary supports. But we do understand that people are doing it tough and we do understand that there needs to be that support provided there.</para>
<para>Indexation is a very important part of it. As I said yesterday, the government pointed out that there was indexation in place from 20 March. Applying this indexation to the age pension increases it to $1,116 a fortnight for singles and $1,682 a fortnight for couples. Parenting payment recipients will see an increase as well. This includes the more than 77,000 single parents—mainly women—who are benefitting from the government's decision to expand eligibility for the single parenting payment until the youngest child turns 14. What you see time and again from this government is our consistent commitment to providing that support where it's required, particularly in relation to the increase in those pensions.</para>
<para>As many of us would know, many people advocated for this for many years. We responded because we understand how vitally important it is. We know the challenges that people are facing today. We all speak to people every day. We know that people are doing it tough. That's why we have a whole range of cost-of-living assistance. I hear from people every day and I know that it's making a huge difference to them, particularly the increases in bulk-billing, being able to see a doctor who can bulk-bill, cheaper medicines, cheaper child care, fee-free TAFE—and, of course, paid parental leave. We're very proud as a Labor government to be increasing that as well, which will mean that a lot more women can be in the workforce. We know that it's great for families, and it's also very good for the economy. So we have done a huge amount, but at the same time we realise that it is very difficult for people within the community.</para>
<para>We as a Labor government are very proud of these supports. They build on our legacy of all that we have already done, whether it be the NDIS, Medicare—all of those measures that provide vital assistance to people and provide the social safety nets we have in place for people, because we know that they're doing it tough. We are committed to, and have a long history of, not leaving anyone behind. That's why we're committed to the cost-of-living measures that you heard about from us, because we know they will make a difference. Indeed, our tax cuts that are coming in from 1 July will make a massive difference.</para>
<para>This government is absolutely committed to providing support for Australians who are doing it tough. We absolutely understand that, and that is why we have a whole range of measures to assist them.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TINK</name>
    <name.id>300124</name.id>
    <electorate>North Sydney</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In the few seconds I have left, I just reiterate that one in eight Australians are living in poverty at the moment.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that the motion moved by the honourable member for North Sydney to suspend standing and sessional orders be agreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
          <division.header>
            <body>
              <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [12:48]<br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)</p>
            </body>
          </division.header>
          <division.data>
            <ayes>
              <num.votes>12</num.votes>
              <title>AYES</title>
              <names>
                <name>Bandt, A. P.</name>
                <name>Bates, S. J.</name>
                <name>Chandler-Mather, M.</name>
                <name>Daniel, Z.</name>
                <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                <name>Ryan, M. M.</name>
                <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                <name>Spender, A. M.</name>
                <name>Steggall, Z.</name>
                <name>Tink, K. J. (Teller)</name>
                <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                <name>Wilkie, A. D. (Teller)</name>
              </names>
            </ayes>
            <noes>
              <num.votes>53</num.votes>
              <title>NOES</title>
              <names>
                <name>Ananda-Rajah, M.</name>
                <name>Belyea, J. A.</name>
                <name>Byrnes, A. J. (Teller)</name>
                <name>Charlton, A. H. G.</name>
                <name>Chesters, L. M.</name>
                <name>Claydon, S. C.</name>
                <name>Coker, E. A.</name>
                <name>Conroy, P. M.</name>
                <name>Doyle, M. J. J.</name>
                <name>Dreyfus, M. A.</name>
                <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                <name>Fernando, C.</name>
                <name>Freelander, M. R.</name>
                <name>Garland, C. M. L.</name>
                <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                <name>Giles, A. J.</name>
                <name>Gorman, P.</name>
                <name>Gosling, L. J.</name>
                <name>Kearney, G. M.</name>
                <name>Khalil, P.</name>
                <name>Lawrence, T. N.</name>
                <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                <name>Leigh, A. K.</name>
                <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                <name>McBain, K. L.</name>
                <name>McBride, E. M.</name>
                <name>McCormack, M. F.</name>
                <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                <name>Mitchell, B. K.</name>
                <name>Mulino, D.</name>
                <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                <name>O'Brien, L. S.</name>
                <name>Payne, A. E.</name>
                <name>Perrett, G. D.</name>
                <name>Phillips, F. E.</name>
                <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                <name>Rishworth, A. L.</name>
                <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                <name>Rowland, M. A.</name>
                <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                <name>Swanson, M. J.</name>
                <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                <name>Vamvakinou, M.</name>
                <name>Watts, T. G.</name>
                <name>Wilson, J. H.</name>
                <name>Zappia, A.</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><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 2) Bill 2024</title>
          <page.no>51</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="r7137" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 2) Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>51</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Third Reading</title>
            <page.no>52</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a third time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a third time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Research Council Amendment (Review Response) Bill 2023</title>
          <page.no>52</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="r7130" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Australian Research Council Amendment (Review Response) Bill 2023</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Consideration of Senate Message</title>
            <page.no>52</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CLARE</name>
    <name.id>HWL</name.id>
    <electorate>Blaxland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That the amendments be agreed to.</para></quote>
<para>This is a great day for Australian research. It's a great day for our researchers. It's a great day for our universities. It's a great day for our reputation in the international research community. The Australian Research Council Amendment (Review Response) Bill 2023, which will pass the parliament in a few minutes, modernises the Australian Research Council and sets it up for the future. It gives certainty to our researchers and universities around research grant funding. It strips away the political interference that has held Australian research back. It does all these things despite the opposition of the coalition.</para>
<para>They opposed this bill right from the get-go. They opposed it in the face of an independent review from a panel of eminent experts, and they opposed it despite broad sector support. They opposed it when regional universities were applauding it for giving a voice to regional, rural and remote researchers. Why did they oppose it? Because they want the ARC to be a political plaything for Liberal Party ministers. That ends today with the passage of this bill.</para>
<para>I once again thank the ARC Review Panel led by Professor Margaret Sheil AO. I thank the many stakeholders who supported the review and this bill—like the Group of Eight, who said that these governance reforms were not only overdue but were essential to the nation's long-term interests; Universities Australia who called it 'game-changing'; and Science and Technology Australia who called the review report a 'thoughtful blueprint for modernisation'. My thanks also go to Senators David Pocock, Faruqi and Thorpe for their thoughtful engagement on it and their amendments which have made this bill even stronger. I commend those amendments and the bill to the House.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question before the House is that the Senate amendments be agreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [13:02] <br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick) </p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>82</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Albanese, A. N.</name>
                  <name>Aly, A.</name>
                  <name>Ananda-Rajah, M.</name>
                  <name>Bandt, A. P.</name>
                  <name>Bates, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Belyea, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Bowen, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Burney, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Butler, M. C.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Chalmers, J. E.</name>
                  <name>Chandler-Mather, M.</name>
                  <name>Charlton, A. H. G.</name>
                  <name>Clare, J. D.</name>
                  <name>Claydon, S. C.</name>
                  <name>Coker, E. A.</name>
                  <name>Collins, J. M.</name>
                  <name>Conroy, P. M.</name>
                  <name>Daniel, Z.</name>
                  <name>Doyle, M. J. J.</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Fernando, C.</name>
                  <name>Freelander, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Garland, C. M. L.</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                  <name>Giles, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P.</name>
                  <name>Gosling, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                  <name>Husic, E. N.</name>
                  <name>Kearney, G. M.</name>
                  <name>Keogh, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Khalil, P.</name>
                  <name>King, C. F.</name>
                  <name>King, M. M. H.</name>
                  <name>Lawrence, T. N.</name>
                  <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                  <name>Leigh, A. K.</name>
                  <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                  <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                  <name>McBain, K. L.</name>
                  <name>McBride, E. M.</name>
                  <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, B. K.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, R. G.</name>
                  <name>Mulino, D.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>O'Connor, B. P. J.</name>
                  <name>O'Neil, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Payne, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Perrett, G. D.</name>
                  <name>Phillips, F. E.</name>
                  <name>Plibersek, T. J.</name>
                  <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                  <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                  <name>Rishworth, A. L.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Rowland, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, M. M.</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Sharkie, R. C. C.</name>
                  <name>Shorten, W. R.</name>
                  <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z.</name>
                  <name>Swanson, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Thistlethwaite, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Tink, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Vamvakinou, M.</name>
                  <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                  <name>Watts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Wells, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Wilkie, A. D.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, J. H.</name>
                  <name>Zappia, A.</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>51</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Andrews, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Archer, B. K.</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>Caldwell, C. M.</name>
                  <name>Chester, D. J.</name>
                  <name>Coleman, D. B.</name>
                  <name>Conaghan, P. J.</name>
                  <name>Coulton, M. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Fletcher, P. W.</name>
                  <name>Gillespie, D. A.</name>
                  <name>Goodenough, I. R. </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>Joyce, B. T. G.</name>
                  <name>Landry, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Leeser, J.</name>
                  <name>Ley, S. P.</name>
                  <name>Marino, N. B.</name>
                  <name>McCormack, M. F.</name>
                  <name>McIntosh, M. I.</name>
                  <name>McKenzie, Z. A.</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, E. L.</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, L. S.</name>
                  <name>Pasin, A.</name>
                  <name>Pearce, G. B.</name>
                  <name>Pike, H. J.</name>
                  <name>Pitt, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Price, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Ramsey, R. E. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Stevens, J.</name>
                  <name>Sukkar, M. S.</name>
                  <name>Taylor, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Tehan, D. T.</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>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 agreed to. </p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division></subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Communications Legislation Amendment (Prominence and Anti-siphoning) Bill 2023</title>
          <page.no>54</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="r7132" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Communications Legislation Amendment (Prominence and Anti-siphoning) Bill 2023</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>54</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BIRRELL</name>
    <name.id>288713</name.id>
    <electorate>Nicholls</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm very pleased to speak on the Communications Legislation Amendment (Prominence and Anti-siphoning) Bill 2023. There are two parts to this legislation, and I'll address them, but I just want to give a bit of background about people from regional areas such as myself and a bit of the history of what got us to this point now.</para>
<para>I grew up in the Goulburn Valley, as people around here know, in the great little place of Murchison, near Shepparton. Back in the eighties we had two channels; we had the ABC, which was channel 3, and we had the local commercial TV station, which was called Gmv-6. Those were the choices I had when I grew up. It's a far cry from what we have now. I can remember watching great shows such as <inline font-style="italic">Magnum P.I.</inline>, <inline font-style="italic">CHiPs</inline>, and <inline font-style="italic">The A-Team</inline>, and then you could go over to the ABC, channel 3, and watch <inline font-style="italic">Monkey Magic</inline>—all those great shows from the eighties. It was a great childhood, I must say.</para>
<para>Aggregation then came, in the 1990s, and with the advent of SBS we had five channels. Bruce Springsteen released a song in 1997 called '57 Channels (And Nothin' On)'. Young fans in the Goulburn Valley must have thought, 'Wow, that's this utopia where there are 57 channels!' We certainly never had anything like that. But 'the Boss' obviously thought more channels was a good thing until they showed the same boring shows not worth watching.</para>
<para>Now, with multichannel broadcasting, a television watched in Shepparton, Numurkah, Murchison or any of those places around my area will receive around 40 free-to-air channels, and I think that's been a good thing, because it's more diverse viewing for people, particularly for young people. Some people used to say television was a bad thing, but I think it is a good educational medium. Those Australians who can afford to pay now also have access to cable or satellite TV, with another eight channels. So, there are some provisions in this bill about new TVs that are sold and whether they have the free-to-air apps already loaded. I think that's fine, provided that it doesn't increase the cost of TVs, which I have a concern about.</para>
<para>One part of this bill seeks to address the complexity and improve the discoverability of free-to-air streaming services. Another part of the bill looks out for people who aren't able to afford pay TV or streaming services and makes sure there'll still be a free-to-air option to watch key Australian content. I think that's really important. It's particularly important for people in regional areas, who often don't have the financial resources or don't have access to the cable or internet streaming that people in metropolitan areas do. It's important that we make sure those people, and we as a nation, can still come together and watch some of these great sporting events, because, let's face it, the Olympics unites us as a nation, and we want everyone to be able to access sporting events such as the Olympics, AFL and all sorts of other key sporting events that become water cooler conversations at work: 'Who won the footy?' or 'How terrible was Collingwood over the weekend?'—or how difficult the West Coast Eagles are finding it, member for Forrest!</para>
<para>But anyway, the important thing is that sporting events that are supposed to stop a nation continue to stop a nation—for everyone, not just for those who can pay. One of the events that does stop the nation is the Melbourne Cup. It has stopped the nation since the late 1800s, and I think it's a great national event. But it's not going to stop the nation this year, because this place will be sitting on Melbourne Cup Day. I think the tradition of the Melbourne Cup stopping the nation is a sad thing to lose. I'll ask those opposite if they might reconsider whether this parliament should sit on Melbourne Cup Day. But that's for another time.</para>
<para>The most important thing about the legislation is that it adapts to growing technologies, and that's what we have to do here in this place. We have to look at the technologies that are coming onto the market—and they're good technologies; streaming technologies are good technologies: Netflix, Amazon Prime, Stan, Disney and the like. All these things are good things. But we've got to make sure that people who don't have access to these streaming services or pay TV—by dent of their simply not having the reception or the internet bandwidth, because they might live in regional areas, or not being able to afford pay TV or streaming services—get to join with the rest of us in enjoying great sporting events such as the summer and winter Olympic Games. We all came together as a nation to watch Cathy Freeman win that 400-metre race in 2000—and for the Paralympic Games, which are amazing because we're coming together to celebrate people with disability. Then there are the Commonwealth Games, which were going to happen in Melbourne but, unfortunately, due to the dysfunctional Victorian government, that is no longer happening—at a great cost, might I add. AFL men's and AFL women's—isn't it great that now we're coming together to watch women's sport in a way that I could never have thought when I was growing up. Women's sport was basically netball and that was it. Now you can turn on free-to-air TV and you can watch the AFLW, and you can watch soccer, the rugby codes, cricket, tennis and motor racing. It's very important. I wanted to make that contribution. It's very important.</para>
<para>We're supporting the government on this legislation. This is what parliaments should do: react to growing technological developments, making sure all Australians get a fair go and are able to come together and watch TV. But I particularly wanted to make the point that part of our culture as a nation is coming together to celebrate these sporting events, particularly when Australian teams are involved. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PERRETT</name>
    <name.id>HVP</name.id>
    <electorate>Moreton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise in support of the Communications Legislation Amendment (Prominence and Anti-Siphoning) Bill 2023 proposed by the honourable member for Greenway. In a fast-changing media, news and entertainment landscape, this amendment clearly demonstrates the commitment of the Albanese government to modern media reform. The reform delivers on our election commitment and guarantees Australians access to local TV and free sports coverage in the streaming era.</para>
<para>Unlike the member for Nicholls who had two channels he could choose from, I grew up in country Queensland, in St George, and I had one channel. I was actually in grade 4 when we got television. When I turned it on, I had that Hobson's choice—it was either the ABC or the national broadcaster. Thankfully, the ABC was pretty good entertainment and pretty informative.</para>
<para>In 2024, the days of turning on the TV and choosing between the ABC, Channel 7, Channel 9, Channel 10 and SBS are long gone. Now, Australians are reaching for the remote control with a profusion of streaming services to choose from. Consequently, the Albanese Labor government has recognised the importance of bringing Australia's regulatory framework for media services into the 21st century. Nearly 70 per cent of us have one streaming service and the average Australian subscribes to two. The question, 'What are you watching on Netflix?' has become as common as water cooler conversations in the nineties about what happened on <inline font-style="italic">A C</inline><inline font-style="italic">ountry Practice</inline> the night before.</para>
<para>The proposed amendments will protect the cultural significance of modern Australian stories, like <inline font-style="italic">A Country </inline><inline font-style="italic">Practice</inline>. The Albanese government is committed to supporting access to local Australian TV services. This will bolster a strong local media industry and enable all Australians to engage in shared experiences and shared economic and cultural lives. This is crucial in any country, but especially in the most multicultural country on earth, where more than half of us were either born overseas or have parents who were born overseas. This is a significant change from Australia at Federation, where nearly 95 per cent of Australians were born in this country, and if they had any connection with a country overseas it was most likely Great Britain.</para>
<para>The first part of this bill introduces a prominence framework for internet-connected television devices. In simple terms, this means ensuring that local free-to-air TV services are easy for viewers to find when they switch their TV on. This ensures that local TV services can continue to play a prominent role in Australia's public and cultural life, preserving our digital water cooler, if you like—or, at the risk of murdering a metaphor, a shared country practice.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Consider it murdered.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PERRETT</name>
    <name.id>HVP</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you, Deputy Speaker, for your guidance. I do point out that, sadly, in Brisbane—the member for Ryan would know this—we don't have a local community broadcasting station anymore. That used to be a voice in the media landscape that was much appreciated in giving some of those non-mainstream voices a platform. That's something for community broadcasting to hopefully sort out.</para>
<para>Australians are a resilient mob. We are tested with bushfires, drought and, in my home state of Queensland, cyclones and devastating flooding such as occurred at the end of last year. Australians always turn to our trusted free-to-air broadcasting services during disasters for up-to-date emergency broadcasts, and we rely on the same services for information about the communities we live in—local news, local information and local sport. They also entertain us, showcasing Australian creativity with Australian stories for all ages. Can you imagine a world without Bluey and Bingo—another proud Queensland export to the world, I would point out?</para>
<para>The key part of the new framework is the requirement for regulated TV device manufacturers to adhere to minimum prominence requirements—if you like, having a <inline font-style="italic">Bluey</inline> button. The Australian Communications and Media Authority, or ACMA, will determine what constitutes a television device. Under the amendment, regulated television devices must provide access to regulated television services; automatically install and update regulated television services, present a prominent live television tile, tab or link; present a separate application, tile or tab on the home screen, ensuring that those tiles or tabs are the same size as those for other paid streaming services available on the device; and, obviously, present the television channels in a logical order.</para>
<para>This amendment will provide Australians with easy and uncomplicated access to trusted news, emergency, and entertainment channels. A Network Ten executive recently said she needed 45 minutes and the help of an engineer to be able to find a Channel Ten app and download it onto her new television, despite being pretty tech savvy. The executive said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">So the entire point to the prominence conversation is to remove the friction … What we're saying is the consumer should know that we're available, it's free …</para></quote>
<para>The prominence requirements will not apply retrospectively to existing television sets and will not constrain device manufacturers from promoting or recommending other content and other services. They also will not affect the search or customise functions of a device. Put simply, the amendments will enhance consumer choice and give Australian free-to-air broadcasters a level playing field. This gives Australians more choice and more control as well as easier access to crucial information, which is particularly important in places like the electorate of Moreton that flood reasonably regularly.</para>
<para>The second part of this amendment focuses on modernising the antisiphoning scheme, an important part of the media reform agenda of the Labor government. For close to 30 years, Australians have enjoyed free-to-air broadcasts of a range of significant sporting events. A review of the scheme found that the objective remains relevant and appropriate—that is, guaranteed free access to televised coverage of events of national importance and cultural significance. Many of these have been moments of 'where were you when', such as at the Atlanta Olympics in 1996 when Kieren Perkins won his second gold in the 1,500-metre freestyle final from lane 8, having actually been the slowest qualifier into the gold medal race. He only made that final by a mere 0.24 seconds, as he was a bit sick at the time. How about when Cathy Freeman won gold at the Sydney Olympics, which was recently voted Australia's great sporting moment, or when Leo Barry—I'm saying this as a Queenslander—took that mark for the Swans in the 2005 AFL grand final? I know that people still talk about the Diamonds' Caitlin Bassett having scored that clutch goal in the final seconds of double overtime when Australia beat New Zealand 58-57 in the 2011 Netball World Cup in Singapore, and I'll never forget when Johnathan Thurston, that great Australian, kicked a field goal for the Cowboys in the 82nd minute to defeat the Broncos 17-16 in 2015, which I will go on the record as saying is the best ever Rugby League grand final. These achievements have become cultural touchstones, as has Steven Bradbury's surprise skate over the line to win Australia's first Winter Olympics gold medal. I particularly mention Steven Bradbury because he trained in my electorate at Acacia Ridge. If you know my electorate, it's amazing that we produced a gold medal at the Winter Olympics.</para>
<para>Camaraderie comes from shared experiences, such as staying up at night to watch the Wallabies, the Matildas or the Socceroos. These are the stories that we share around the water cooler at work, in the schoolyard, at the shops, or in the market square. They are the things that hold our community together. Thanks to the antisiphoning scheme, we can all watch and support our favourite athletes and teams. It gives us a language to speak. The scheme provides free access to a range of nationally important and culturally significant events, aka the list. Under this scheme, subscription television licensees—this is, pay per view—are prevented from acquiring broadcast rights unless a free-to-air provider has the rights. The Albanese government has undertaken a comprehensive review of the scheme and the list of events in collaboration with stakeholders and public consultation. This review found that the scheme's purpose is still appropriate in terms of forces that will hold this whole show together—this show called Australia—but obviously we also now need to incorporate online services.</para>
<para>Currently, streaming services are not part of the scheme, leaving open the risk that they could acquire the rights to iconic sporting events ahead of free-to-air broadcasters. This would limit Australian viewers' access to iconic events such as some of those I mentioned earlier. The Albanese government does not want Australian viewers to have to put their hands in their pockets to watch sports that they have traditionally viewed for free, which are paid for by advertising and all those other mechanisms. We believe that all Australians, no matter where they live or what they earn, should have a fair dinkum opportunity to watch iconic sporting events. Such infrastructure helps build community. The reforms will expand the scope of the restriction to include online services as well as subscription television broadcasting licensees.</para>
<para>Last year Australia co-hosted the FIFA Women's World Cup, making the Matildas a household name—and I believe they're playing in Canberra next Tuesday night—thrilling the nation and inspiring young football players, girls and also boys. I saw that at the games I went to in Brisbane. Over 6.2 million people watched Australia's semi-final against England on free-to-air television. The penalty shootout against France in the game preceding was truly an iconic moment. Luckily it was one that all Australians had the opportunity to watch.</para>
<para>The effect of free-to-air broadcasting of major sporting events goes beyond the enjoyment of the shared experience and the strengthening of our collective identity. It has immeasurable impact at the grassroots level, with community based sport participation benefiting, as I'm sure you know well, Deputy Speaker, as the chair of the committee looking into diabetes at the moment.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Indeed.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PERRETT</name>
    <name.id>HVP</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Safeguarding the opportunity to watch sport will strengthen these outcomes. Big sporting moments create more people signing up for community sport. More people involved in sport makes us a healthier and stronger nation.</para>
<para>The reforms will prevent media content service providers from acquiring the right to broadcast an event on the list until a free-to-air broadcaster has acquired the right to televise the event. This extends the scope of the scheme, which currently only restricts subscription television broadcasting licences. The revised scheme would also extend the automatic delisting period from six months to 12 months.</para>
<para>Another aspect of the reform is to extend the list to reflect changing community expectations. Historically the list was focused on men's sporting events—pre the Diamonds and the Matildas, to name a few. Involvement in women's sport at the community level is growing rapidly around Australia. My cricket clubs, rugby clubs and even football clubs, traditionally male domains, tell me how wonderful it is to have more female players and how the clubs become stronger, better for the family and better for the community. No doubt these trends have been bolstered by the success of the Australian women's cricket team and intense interest in sports such as the Super Netball, Women's Big Bash League, the AFL Women's League and the National Rugby League Women's Premiership. The revised list will include events such as the final series of the AFLW, the NRLW and the women's Ashes.</para>
<para>The other focus will be on sports that involve athletes with a disability. As a member of the Brisbane Olympic and Paralympic Games Organising Committee, I'm particularly glad to see that the Summer Paralympic Games are included on the enhanced list. This important evolution reflects community interests and expectations. It also bolsters the nearly half-a-million-dollar Labor government initiative to identify talented Australian Paralympic athletes in the lead-up to the 2032 Olympic Games in Brisbane. We're all familiar with the phrase 'you can't be what you can't see', and this inclusion will ensure that budding Paralympians are able to cheer their athlete heroes on free of charge. So these important amendments contribute to a strong and sustainable media sector. The antisiphoning scheme and listed amendments will ensure the continued opportunity to watch, free of charge, the iconic events that reflect our national identity and our national diversity.</para>
</continue>
<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. The debate may be resumed at a later hour, and the member will be granted leave to continue, if he wishes to do so.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</title>
        <page.no>58</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Dragon Boat Pumicestone Inc.</title>
          <page.no>58</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr YOUNG</name>
    <name.id>201906</name.id>
    <electorate>Longman</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Recently, I had the pleasure of attending Dragon Boat Pumicestone's first birthday celebrations. Dragon boating in Australia was started by one of my local constituents, Michelle Hanton AOM, as a vehicle to change the way breast cancer was viewed in Australia and around the world. Dragon boating has since morphed into a movement that builds team spirit, develops fitness, promotes health and, most of all, is simply just good fun. It attracts not only breast cancer survivors but people from all walks of life—both men and women, and young and not so young.</para>
<para>In a time when many memberships of various clubs and community organisations are waning, to their credit, Dragon Boat Pumicestone are bucking that trend. They started 12 months ago with just 22 members, and just one year later their membership has reached an impressive 91 members.</para>
<para>My wife, Alex, and I had I'll call it the pleasure of joining the crew for one of their paddles, and, can I say, if you really want to get your heart rate up and bruise your ego I suggest that you give dragon boating a go, because I can personally testify that my lack of fitness was very much shown up by men and women who were more than 10 years my senior.</para>
<para>To all those involved with Dragon Boat Pumicestone: happy first birthday and may there be many more.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Nowruz</title>
          <page.no>58</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms FERNANDO</name>
    <name.id>299964</name.id>
    <electorate>Holt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to extend warm wishes to the Afghan committee in my electorate of Holt and beyond as they celebrate Nowruz, the Afghan new year. Nowruz is a time of renewable, hope and joy for millions around the world. As we welcome this auspicious occasion, let us reflect on the resilience and strength of the Afghan people both here in Australia and in Afghanistan. Despite the challenges they have faced, the Afghan community continue to enrich our society with vibrant culture, traditions and contributions in the fields of business, art, sport and others. Nowruz symbolises new beginnings, unity and triumph of light over darkness. It is a time of reconciliation, forgiveness and embracing the spirit of harmony.</para>
<para>To the Afghan community in my electorate and across the nation: I extend my heartfelt wishes for a joyous Nowruz. May this new year bring each and every one of you prosperity, happiness and peace. Let us celebrate the spirit of Nowruz with open hearts and minds, embracing the values of unity, tolerance and understanding. Nowruz Mubarak.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Roads</title>
          <page.no>58</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GOODENOUGH</name>
    <name.id>74046</name.id>
    <electorate>Moore</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm pleased to inform the House that construction is about to commence on the long awaited upgrade to the busy intersection of Walter Padbury Boulevard and Hepburn Avenue, including the Lilburne Avenue junction. The City of Joondalup has advised that the detailed design for the intersection upgrade has been awarded to an engineering consultant, with the final design to be completed by late May. This will be followed by a tender process from June to mid-July. The construction contract is expected to be awarded in early August, with the commencement of site works in early September. Construction is estimated to take 30 weeks and is scheduled to be completed by May 2025.</para>
<para>Our community has actively lobbied for an upgrade to this busy intersection for a decade. I acknowledge the state government funding secured for this project by the member for Hillarys Caitlin Collins MLA. Our next priority must be the upgrade of the dangerous Seacrest Drive and Marmion Avenue intersection located nearby, which has been the scene of more than 31 traffic collisions in recent times.</para>
<para>I have written to the Western Australian Deputy Premier and Minister for Transport, Rita Saffioti MLA, urging the WA state government to urgently commit to funding for road safety improvements at this very busy and dangerous intersection.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Witanowski, Mr Daniel</title>
          <page.no>58</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr REID</name>
    <name.id>300126</name.id>
    <electorate>Robertson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today I rise to commend Mr Daniel Witanowski, who has been awarded a 10 year long service medal for his involvement with the Duke of Edinburgh's International Award. Mr Witanowski is a teacher at Green Point Christian College and connects students with the Duke of Ed award through programs and projects. Green Point Christian College is an outstanding high school that educates and nurtures young men and women to reach their full potential, guided by Christian principles. The Duke of Edinburgh's international award is the global leader in the organisation and accreditation of non-formal education through its framework. For over 60 years, this framework has been used by education providers and community organisations to accredit the non-formal learning outcomes and achievements of young people. The award in Australia started in 1959 and over 800,000 young Australians have participated in the award since it began. I would like to take this opportunity to thank Mr Witanowski for all of his work supporting young students at the Green Point Christian College and connecting them with the Duke of Ed International Award. I would also like to thank our hard-working teachers right across the Central Coast, and indeed right across NSW, who do so much to ensure that our young people, the leaders of tomorrow, have the knowledge and tools to succeed throughout their lives.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Roads</title>
          <page.no>59</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr HAINES</name>
    <name.id>282335</name.id>
    <electorate>Indi</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last Friday, the town of Rutherglen in my electorate of Indi experienced a shocking accident right in the centre of town. A B-double truck ploughed into a parked car and knocked down a power pole and the veranda of a cafe. This accident demonstrates the serious concerns of the Rutherglen community where hundreds of trucks drive through the narrow, heritage main street of this bustling, beautiful tourist town every single day. It's a miracle that no-one was injured. Local resident Herb Ellerbock had only stepped out of his car five minutes earlier.</para>
<para>The people of Rutherglen have long called for a truck bypass but this issue has been at a standstill for decades. This government dumped plans for the Rutherglen heavy vehicle bypass route from the infrastructure pipeline last year after the Victorian government sat on their hands and failed to take the concerns of local people seriously. In fact, the Victorian government has unspent funds that were meant to be used on this bypass. A petition started by Indigo Shire Councillor Roberta Horne calls for the unspent funds to be urgently spent on traffic calming measures to increase safety for pedestrians. This government must also act to increase funding for rural and regional roads—our safety depends on it. Rutherglen residents have been rattled by trucks rolling through their beautiful town for long enough. No community member should live in fear of their life when simply walking down their main street.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Harmony Week</title>
          <page.no>59</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms ROBERTS</name>
    <name.id>157125</name.id>
    <electorate>Pearce</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Harmony Week runs from 18 March to 24 March and today, March 21, is the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. Harmony Week is a celebration of inclusiveness and respect, a week in which we recognise our diversity to bring Australians from all different backgrounds together. Living in Pearce, we are fortunate to have a proud Indigenous heritage that's passed down through generations of the Whadjuk people of the Noongar nation. Many people have settled here from right across the world including England, South Africa, New Zealand, India and Scotland; as well as other countries in Europe, North Africa, the Middle East, the Americas and Asia. We do truly represent a multicultural society. I'm very happy to be part of a government that celebrates our differences and supports our diverse community groups. In Pearce, we have supported various community projects including the Vaishnav Sangh of WA, the Vietnamese Cultural Centre, the Shree Jalaram Mandal Temple, the Organisation of African Communities in WA, and provided funding for the Kingsway Markets multicultural mural. Our government remains committed to delivering a better future for all Australians. I send my best wishes to everyone in Pearce and Australia for Harmony Week as communities come together to share their culture, food, language and experiences.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Universities</title>
          <page.no>59</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STEGGALL</name>
    <name.id>175696</name.id>
    <electorate>Warringah</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In May last year, along with members of the crossbench, I raised concerns with the Minister of Education at the unfair timing and indexation for CPI of HECS debts. 10 months on, nothing has changed and we are approaching the next indexation date of 1 June. 2.9 million Australians have some form of HECS debt and it takes close to 10 years to repay it in full. The current HECS system impacts the number of young people attending university to be our future workforce. Older Australians are also returning to university to retrain or gain further qualifications, many of whom are women. Right now, HECS repayments are lumped with income tax as a tax-withholding payment to the ATO until you do your tax returns, rather than being payments that reduce your HECS debt in real time. Either the HECS repayment withheld by the ATO should be attributed in real time to your debt and decrease it or we must move the indexation date. This would reduce the burden on all of those who are struggling under the HECS debt burden.</para>
<para>There is a fantastic petition by the member for Kooyong, with now over 160,000 people supporting it, calling for changes to HECS indexation. I call on the Minister for Education to deal with this as a matter of urgency and absolutely before 1 June 2024.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Didi Bahini Samaj Victoria</title>
          <page.no>59</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KHALIL</name>
    <name.id>101351</name.id>
    <electorate>Wills</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Australia has one of the highest rates of domestic violence against women among developed countries. The Albanese Labor government is working tirelessly to address this, and today I want to acknowledge the work of grassroots organisations, particularly Didi Bahini Samaj Victoria. They play a pivotal role in our community and in my electorate of Wills. Didi Bahini Samaj is a critical lifeline for migrant Nepalese women facing the scourge of domestic violence. I recently met with the wonderful women who run this organisation, and I've supported them in their volunteer activities over time. These Australian Nepalese women, busy with their own families and their own jobs, still volunteer their time to provide vital services to migrant Nepalese women.</para>
<para>Didi Bahini Samaj serves as a crucial first point of contact for culturally sensitive support for women seeking assistance. Last year they assisted and referred on to relevant services over 75 women in critical situations. The journey of migrant women is often fraught with obstacles, including financial hardship, gender imbalance and cultural adaptation difficulty. Didi Bahini Samaj goes beyond just providing critical support; it also addresses and helps women overcome these obstacles. They are investing in the success of migrant Nepalese women through capacity building, social engagement, cultural celebration and advocacy. This organisation is completely volunteer run, and all their work is funded by small grants and donations. I really want to acknowledge in this place the work that they do.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Othman, Ms Falak</title>
          <page.no>60</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CONAGHAN</name>
    <name.id>279991</name.id>
    <electorate>Cowper</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm delighted to be able to recognise an impressive young lady in my electorate, 19-year-old Falak Othman. Falak and her family fled war in Syria for Iraq in 2012 and came to Australia in 2017. Already fluent in Arabic, Kurdish and Turkish, Falak added English to her linguistic credentials within one year, at the age of 14. She also has a basic grasp of Chinese and German. I struggle sometimes with one language; she knows six. Falak has put these skills to good use. As a child, she translated for others with UNICEF in Iraq for three years during the war in the Middle East, supporting people suffering from trauma. Since arriving on our shores, she has volunteered as a translator for refugees in Coffs Harbour. As a refugee herself, Falak has a deep understanding of the gaps that exist in creating a smooth transition into life in a new country.</para>
<para>Falak is currently studying nursing and business and balances her academic endeavours with her community work. On International Women's Day earlier this month, Falak was presented the Coffs Coast Woman of the Year Award, a well deserved recognition for an inspirational young woman. Congratulations, Falak.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, Harmony Week</title>
          <page.no>60</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MASCARENHAS</name>
    <name.id>298800</name.id>
    <electorate>Swan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>As a nation, we find it difficult to talk about racism. It's no different for me. Today is the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. It prompts me to remember the first time that I experienced racism. I was 10 years old. I was on a hockey field. I burst into tears. Racism hurts, offends and excludes people and can have a lasting impact. Racism in any form or any place is unacceptable. This goes for all parts of our society, whether it's a mine site, a bar, Instagram or our parliament. Modern Australia is a multicultural Australia, and in modern Australia there is no room for racism.</para>
<para>It's also Harmony Week, and I believe that one of the things in overcoming barriers to acceptance is listening. I think that this is a way that we can bridge the divide between cultures and celebrate our shared humanity. This is more important than ever before. Diversity is a strength—we know this scientifically—but we also need to see this in our decision-making bodies. So our decision-making bodies must reflect our communities, whether that's ASX 200 boards, P&Cs or our Parliament House. I am proud that the 47th Parliament is the most multicultural in our history. I stand next to the member for Reid and the member for Bennelong, and we're all children of migrants. Thank you.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Parkes Electorate</title>
          <page.no>60</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr COULTON</name>
    <name.id>HWN</name.id>
    <electorate>Parkes</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>At the moment, the people in my electorate are under attack. They're not under attack from flood or drought or pestilence. They're under attack from the elected government of this country. At the moment, they are dealing with issues like losing 450 gigalitres of productive water—the very lifeblood that employs people and provides prosperity and the very reason these communities are there. They are also now faced with a tax where the farmers have to actually pay their competitors for the goods that are coming into the country to compete with their own products. It's one of the most bizarre policies I have ever seen in this place. And, on top of that, they've got to pay thousands of dollars more for their tools of trade—their utes and their cars—that are necessary just to go about their daily lives.</para>
<para>So I ask the question: what have the people of the Parkes electorate ever done for you? I'll tell you what they've done. They've kept the lights on with the coal they provide. They've provided food, clothing and mineral wealth. During the pandemic, the balance of payment came from regional Australia. These people are the salt of the earth. The Indigenous communities, the rural towns, the farmers and the miners—the very people that keep the wheels of this economy going—at the moment are under a scurrilous attack from a city based government that does not care about them.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, Reid Electorate: Community Events</title>
          <page.no>61</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SITOU</name>
    <name.id>298121</name.id>
    <electorate>Reid</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, or Harmony Day, is a day for us to do two things. It's a day to recognise the part we all play in stamping out racism and in building social cohesion in our communities. It's also a day to celebrate our wonderful multicultural society, and my electorate is a wonderful example of that diversity. Just over half the residents of the electorate of Reid were born overseas. They speak more than 149 different languages, including Chinese, Korean, Nepali, Arabic, Italian, Tamil, Hindi and Greek. They come from different backgrounds and cultures, but they've all decided to call Australia home and have chosen to live in the electorate of Reid.</para>
<para>I want to welcome people from all backgrounds to our community. That's why I'm hosting a great Aussie barbecue on Saturday 4 May at the Kokoda Track Memorial Walkway. It's a chance for new citizens and people who have just moved into the area to get to know their neighbours by coming together for a barbecue. I want to thank the Rotary Club of Concord for helping with the barbecue and the Kokoda Track Memorial Walkway for hosting us and providing a talk on Australia's history at Kokoda. If you're new to the area, please join me and other members of the community for a sausage sizzle and a chat.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Green, Ms Sienna</title>
          <page.no>61</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILLCOX</name>
    <name.id>286535</name.id>
    <electorate>Dawson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to honour an exceptional talent in the form of a tenacious, hardworking and dedicated 26-year-old woman from my part of the world, Sienna Green. Sienna is a third-generation professional fisher who has been running her own fishing operation for the last six years. That's right: this amazing young woman has been running her own fishing operation since she was just 20 years old.</para>
<para>Sienna's achievements were acknowledged this past week as she was presented with the Young Achiever Award at the Queensland Seafood Industry Awards 2024. Sienna's journey hasn't been without its trials and tribulations, though. Following the devastating announcement from the Albanese Labor government that they would be banning the use of commercial gillnets, Sienna's livelihood and chosen profession came under threat. In her speech, Sienna eloquently said: 'I hope by winning this award I am doing our wild-caught inshore fishery proud. And maybe this might be a step to having our new fishery and what we supply showcased to the public, rather than being swept under the carpet as it is now.'</para>
<para>I couldn't have said this better myself. Congratulations, Sienna. Your dedication to this industry is to be admired. We are so, so proud of you. Well done.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cost of Living</title>
          <page.no>61</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RYAN</name>
    <name.id>249224</name.id>
    <electorate>Lalor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Albanese government's No. 1 priority is addressing inflation and cost-of-living pressures. As the member for Lalor, I know how hard people are doing it in the community that I represent. But the good news is that, on 1 July this year, the Albanese Labor government will deliver a tax cut for every Australian taxpayer—that is 13.6 million people across the country and every taxpayer in my community. These tax cuts will deliver a bigger tax cut for Middle Australia to help with the cost of living. They build on our targeted relief, while not adding to inflation.</para>
<para>I'm proud to be a member of the Albanese Labor government, an optimistic government—a government that sees every challenge as an opportunity, just as we see this as an opportunity. We see delivering for Australians across the country as something that should be the government's priority. We are committed to repair, reform and relief, to support every Australian family, because we want Australians to earn more—and that is well on the way—and because we want Australians to keep more of what they earn. The tax cuts and the pay rises work together to support Australians around the country. I know what they mean in my electorate of Lalor. I know what they mean to my optimistic community.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Energy</title>
          <page.no>61</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr GILLESPIE</name>
    <name.id>72184</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The champagne corks were popping, over in the ministerial wing, when the default market offer reductions were announced. But—hey presto!—it's only $1 a week, when Ausgrid's fees have gone up $380 since this government came to power; Essential Energy, in my area, $642; Energex, $567; and Endeavour Energy, $576.</para>
<para>Yet the energy minister keeps saying that more renewables mean cheaper electricity. What he fails to realise is that levelised costs of energy, which GenCost and CSIRO use, and which the ISP is based on, do not reflect the full cost of the system. The system delivers you electricity, not the generators. That is the standalone measure. You have to have a levelised full-system cost, including the true cost of integration and batteries and storage.</para>
<para>Grid expansion is not factored in accurately. They have just approved, by bypassing the national electricity regulations, $9 billion of grid expansion. The Australian Energy Regulator and AEMO will be responsible as they over-build unnecessary grids, destroy our grid stability and destroy the environment by building all these unnecessary wind farms, solar farms and grids across the country.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Nuclear Energy</title>
          <page.no>62</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LAXALE</name>
    <name.id>299174</name.id>
    <electorate>Bennelong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to address the radioactive rhetoric by the Liberals and Nationals, because, after nearly 10 years in government and almost 70 years since they first raised it in parliament, the Liberals and Nats now think that nuclear is the answer to the nation's complex energy transition. And they are not satisfied with just pushing this fantasy. We have since seen the Leader of the Opposition shamefully attack our nation's scientists in pursuit of his latest cooked policy. CSIRO's GenCost report, which outed nuclear as the most expensive form of power, was based on science and fact and things that exist, and it was attacked. Then, when CSIRO rejected the Leader of the Opposition's toxicity and called for calm, what did he do? He attacked them again.</para>
<para>So let's call a spade a spade. Their cooker-style, antiscience rhetoric is dangerous and desperate. Everyone in this place wants Australians to pay less for power. Yet, in their warped reality, the Liberals think that the best way to get power bills down is by investing in the most expensive form of power, destined to put prices up.</para>
<para>At the last election, Aussies elected Labor to back in renewables, and we had evidence this week that our plan is working. The lower wholesale power prices go, the better it will be for retail power prices.</para>
<para>So, with our cost-of-living tax cuts and record investments in renewable energy, Labor wants Australians to earn more and keep more of what they earn.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Mobile Black Spot Program</title>
          <page.no>62</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:53</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr COLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>241067</name.id>
    <electorate>Banks</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I am sure that all members of this House are very much looking forward to the release, shortly, by the Auditor-General of his inquiry into round 6 of the Mobile Black Spot Program. Everyone will welcome the thorough investigation by the Auditor-General, because of course this was a shameful and sordid misuse of public funds. You'll recall, of course, that, under this fund, the Minister for Communications hand-picked the locations to receive funding. And guess what? It's a remarkable coincidence, but 100 per cent of the locations that the Minister for Communications chose in New South Wales were in electorates held by the Australian Labor Party! Isn't it remarkable? It is just an extraordinary coincidence! The funny thing is, oddly, precisely the same thing happened in Victoria: 100 per cent of the allocations were in Labor seats. That's why the Auditor-General's been very thoroughly and very forensically going through all of the information here, and we look forward to seeing his report. I hope the minster has provided him with documents, because, of course, the minister put formal submissions to the Information Commissioner about why she should not provide any documents in response to freedom of information requests on this topic. That tells you everything you need to know. It's a shameful misuse of public funds. We very much look forward to seeing that Auditor-General report very soon.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Lymphoedema</title>
          <page.no>62</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MILLER-FROST</name>
    <name.id>296272</name.id>
    <electorate>Boothby</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Yesterday we welcomed lymphoedema advocates to Parliament House, including the South Australian Local Hero of 2022, Monique Bareham, and the CEO of Lift Cancer Care Services, Lauren Whiting from my electorate of Boothby. Lymphoedema is a chronic condition. It's an insufficiency of the lymph system in collecting fluid from the body and returning it to the circulatory system. The collection of fluid causes swelling in the affected body part, causing heaviness, aching, and decreased mobility. Swollen skin can leak and crack, and infections take hold from even from a small scratch.</para>
<para>Lymphoedema can also be caused by surgery or radiation for cancer treatment. Prevalence in breast cancer survivors is up to 20 per cent, up to 30 per cent in melanoma survivors, up to 50 per cent in head and neck cancers, and up to 47 per cent in gynaecological and prostate cancers. It can also be caused by obesity or age, with estimates of 30 per cent prevalence in nursing homes. Some children are born with primary lymphoedema.</para>
<para>The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare last year released a report that they called <inline font-style="italic">Towards </inline><inline font-style="italic">an estimate of the prevalence of lymphoedema in Australia,</inline> reflecting that we don't know how many people are living with this condition. The data simply is not collected. Advocates are seeking a national lymphoedema register and the inclusion of lymphoedema questions in the integrated assessment tool for aged care. Thank you to all of those who came to educate us on this important issue.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Services Australia</title>
          <page.no>63</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FLETCHER</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
    <electorate>Bradfield</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The performance of Services Australia is getting worse and worse under the member for Maribyrnong. The latest figures came out in Senate estimates in February. Call wait times continue to skyrocket. People who call the families and parenting line have seen call wait times more than double under Labor. Many Australians are waiting months for their claims to be processed, with the Albanese government offering few solutions. People applying for the low-income card are now waiting five times longer compared to when the coalition was in government.</para>
<para>It's bad all around Australia. People in Longreach are waiting 105 days on average to receive the age pension. Those in Wollondilly are waiting, on average, almost 81 days to receive the low-income card. The Coalition has been seeking this localised data for months. We now know why the member for Maribyrnong has been so reluctant to offer it, because it highlights his failures. It highlights the fact that Australians are waiting longer, even as they go through a cost-of-living crisis.</para>
<para>The member for Maribyrnong boasts about hiring more staff at Services Australia, but he's only provisioned funding until 30 June this year. I repeat my calls for there to be a root and branch review of Services Australia's operations to fix this mess and give Australians the service levels they deserve.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gender Equality</title>
          <page.no>63</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PERRETT</name>
    <name.id>HVP</name.id>
    <electorate>Moreton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Recently I hosted an event for International Women's Day, with my special guest and good friend the honourable Minister for the Environment and Water. The theme for International Women's Day was 'Count her in: invest in women, accelerate progress'. Amongst the many who filled the Sherwood Uniting Church hall were women asking questions about housing for older women and the pressure on working parents regarding childcare.</para>
<para>I'm proud to be part of a government that is putting these issues front and centre through the first <inline font-style="italic">National Strategy </inline><inline font-style="italic">to</inline><inline font-style="italic"> Achieve Gender Equality</inline>. The Albanese Labor government has a 10-year plan to address the issues that women say matters to them. The Working for Women strategy focuses on women's safety, sharing and valuing care, economic equality, health, leadership and decision-making. Labor has already invested in cheaper child care and an expansion of paid parental leave.</para>
<para>But there's more work to do. Now companies with more than 100 employees have to publish information on the gender pay gap. This is a major step towards transparency, accountability and change. We announced superannuation payments on government paid parental leave, a key recommendation of the Women's Economic Equality Taskforce, and long campaigned for by unions and the women's movement. Alongside our tax cuts and key investments in cheaper child care, women's safety, women's health, parenting payments single and workplace relations reform, our government continues to focus on women's economic security as a key feature of its economic plan.</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>CONDOLENCES</title>
        <page.no>63</page.no>
        <type>CONDOLENCES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fitzgibbon, Lance Corporal Jack Patrick</title>
          <page.no>63</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Reference to Federation Chamber</title>
            <page.no>66</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
    <electorate>Watson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I declare that the resumption of debate on the Prime Minister's motion of condolence in connection with the death of Lance Corporal Jack Patrick Fitzgibbon is referred to the Federation Chamber.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</title>
        <page.no>66</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Economy</title>
          <page.no>66</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TAYLOR</name>
    <name.id>231027</name.id>
    <electorate>Hume</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's hard to follow from what we've just heard, but my question is to the Treasurer. Since the election, the adult population has increased by over a million people. Meanwhile, homebuilding completions are around one-quarter of that. We are in a GDP per capita or family recession. The only thing left driving the economy is migration, at a time when Labor's housing crisis is worsening. Why is this government taking our economy in the wrong direction?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr CHALMERS</name>
    <name.id>37998</name.id>
    <electorate>Rankin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the shadow Treasurer for his question. We are not. For evidence of that have a look at the quite remarkable jobs numbers that we got a couple of hours ago. We've got unemployment falling. Real wages are growing. Inflation is moderating. In each of those three respects the economy is in a stronger position than what it was when we inherited it in May 2022.</para>
<para>When it comes to the migration numbers that the shadow Treasurer asked about and indeed the housing situation that the shadow Treasurer asked about, today we did get more data about net overseas migration. The reason that number is relatively high is the arrival of international students. What today's data doesn't take into account is the quite substantial action that ministers and the government have taken when it comes to putting downward pressure on this net overseas migration. A number of these actions were implemented in the second half of last year and therefore are not yet accurately captured in the new data that we have today.</para>
<para>Indeed, from this weekend there will be new steps to tighten up some of the program to make sure we crack down on the highest-risk providers in the education system. We're introducing a new genuine-student test. This is on top of other actions we've taken: closing the COVID scheme, strengthening integrity, tackling exploitation, targeting skilled migration to genuine shortages, and increasing the minimum wage threshold for skilled migrants after it was frozen by those opposite for nearly a decade. So we're taking action when it comes to net overseas migration, but we recognise that it is largely a story about students and the strength of our university sector.</para>
<para>When it comes to housing—and I want to say this in a respectful way that reflects the respectful way the shadow Treasurer asked his question today in the context of the speeches that were given a moment ago—if those opposite were serious about the housing shortage in this country they'd vote to help fix it. We have proposed—and, again, a tribute to the housing minister and the cabinet, the Prime Minister—about 17 different housing policies, and they've not all been supported by those opposite. There is a shortage of housing in this country, and we're doing our best to address that and alleviate that, and if those opposite were serious about it they'd help us.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Defence: United Kingdom</title>
          <page.no>67</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SWANSON</name>
    <name.id>264170</name.id>
    <electorate>Paterson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister. How is the Albanese Labor government progressing our defence cooperation with the United Kingdom to keep all Australian safe?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MARLES</name>
    <name.id>HWQ</name.id>
    <electorate>Corio</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Firstly, can I welcome the Right Honourable Grant Shapps, the UK Defence Secretary. It is a pleasure to have him here during question time. I can say that I've spoken with the opposition and collectively we've agreed that over the course of the next hour our behaviour will represent the high watermark of Australia's democracy!</para>
<para>This morning Secretary Shapps and I signed the defence and security cooperation agreement between Australia and the United Kingdom, which is a status of forces agreement between our two countries. It contains a commitment to consult with each other when there are contingencies which engage our national security and our sovereignty. It is a historic agreement.</para>
<para>Britain is our oldest relationship and our oldest friend. We have long had deep people-to-people ties. We have long had a deep cultural relationship. So it is somewhat of a surprise that it is only now that we are signing a status of forces agreement. Yet it reflects the fact that over the last couple of years we have seen emerge a strategic and security dimension to this relationship. Britain is increasing its presence in the Indo-Pacific, and today there are Australian service men and women in the UK training Ukrainian armed forces. Our two defence forces are working ever closely together, so this agreement is both practical and timely.</para>
<para>This afternoon the two of us will join foreign minister Senator Penny Wong and Foreign Secretary David Cameron to participate in the annual 2+2 AUKMIN dialogue between our two countries.</para>
<para>This will be happening in Adelaide, which will afford us all an opportunity to visit the Osborne naval shipyard, where under the banner of AUKUS, which is very much at the heart of our relationship, Australia will be establishing a production line to build our future nuclear-powered submarines with the assistance of the United Kingdom and the United States. The submarines that we produce there, that class of submarines, will be jointly operated by Australia and the UK. There is no greater statement than this of the significance of the security dimension of the Australia-UK relationship.</para>
<para>Can I say to Grant I am deeply grateful for our personal friendship. That, along with the friendship of so many Aussies and Brits, is emblematic of the bilateral relationship which exists between our two countries. We look forward, in a difficult world, to walking into the future side by side making our contribution to global peace and security.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>On indulgence, the member for Canning?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HASTIE</name>
    <name.id>260805</name.id>
    <electorate>Canning</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Can I join the Deputy Prime Minister in welcoming Defence Secretary Shapps and High Commissioner Smith. It's great to have you here today. I associate this side of the House with the Deputy Prime Minister's comments. On the UK-Australia relationship we are of one mind, so we welcome this status of forces agreement and also deepening our country ties, specifically through AUKUS. So I look forward to hearing more of your planned meetings. We will be there all the way with you.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Migration</title>
          <page.no>67</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SUKKAR</name>
    <name.id>242515</name.id>
    <electorate>Deakin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. In the year ending 30 September 2023, net overseas migration was 548,800 people, which is an increase of 206,500, a 60 per cent increase, from the previous year. Prime Minister, don't these figures just confirm that Labor's housing crisis is worsening, with overseas arrivals now running at four times the rate of new home builds?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I join with members of parliament in welcoming the UK minister here. I look forward to welcoming minister Shapps to the Lodge later today, along with Minister Cameron, the foreign minister. We will be hosting the AUKMIN dedication there later this evening before they head to Adelaide for what will be a very important meeting. I look forward to hearing the feedback about your trip to Osborne. I was able to host the High Commissioner just on Tuesday evening as well to get a briefing about the relationship between Australia and the UK, of which the AUKUS arrangements and our Defence relationship is so important.</para>
<para>On the question, the fact is that migration is lower than it was anticipated to be; the population figures lower than what was anticipated to be under the former government. Indeed, the Business Council of Australia have said that in fact new housing supply has been falling over the last half decade. They said that in 2023 about the period in which those opposite were in government—not the ACTU, the Business Council of Australia. I know they are antibusiness a lot of the time these days. The modern Liberal Party have just been moving further and further and further to the right, so they are a party now led by people like Senator Antic and others, rather than mainstream people. The member for Deakin's faction are running that mob in Melbourne into the ground.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Deakin will leave the chamber under 94(a). When I am giving someone the call that is not the time to add an insult to somebody, trust me.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The member for Deakin then left the chamber.</inline></para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Wannon is entitled to raise a point of order and he should be heard in silence and no interjections will occur while I hear this point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Tehan</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It goes to relevance. You can't shake it off. Arrivals are running at four times the rate—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Resume your seat. The Prime Minister was asked a question about migration. He's giving exact context about the figures with migration. It's virtually impossible to raise a point of order on relevance when he's directly answering the question he was asked, particularly on immigration. And now he's talking about housing. We simply aren't going to have people getting up and taking points of order because they don't like the answer. The Prime Minister has the call.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I quoted the peak organisation, but I'll quote another—senior businesswoman, Susan Lloyd-Hurwitz, the former head of Mirvac. She knows something about housing. She's the Chair of the National Housing Supply and Affordability Council, and she said: 'Housing and rental affordability is a real problem which has been decades in the making, fundamentally a housing supply issue.'</para>
<para>The nation's housing ministers under the former government did not meet over five years. There were no meetings; none. By the end of their nine years in office at the end of the June quarter 2022, the number of private dwellings completed had fallen to 41,000, the lowest quarterly number since 2014. The person who just got dismissed from the chamber had this to say: 'States and territories have the primary responsibility. There's a lot of work to be done by states and territories.' He was the federal minister— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Employment</title>
          <page.no>68</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEMPLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>181810</name.id>
    <electorate>Macquarie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Treasurer. What are today's jobs figures, and what do they mean for the Albanese Labor government's economic strategy? What approaches have been rejected?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr CHALMERS</name>
    <name.id>37998</name.id>
    <electorate>Rankin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thanks to the member for Macquarie for her great work and her great question. The jobs numbers today were absolutely remarkable: 116,000 new jobs were created in the month of February, and 790,000 jobs have been created under this Prime Minister and his government. That is another new record from a first-term government. The unemployment rate fell substantially from 4.1 per cent to 3.7 per cent. What an amazing tribute to our workers, our employers and the resilience of our labour market.</para>
<para>Inflation is the lowest in two years. Unemployment is the lowest in six months. Real wages are growing ahead of schedule. And we will get tax cuts flowing from 1 July. This means more people are working, more people are earning more and more people will be keeping more of what they earn as well. This is the trifecta—unemployment falling, inflation moderating, real wages growing again in our economy.</para>
<para>Despite a slowing economy, despite all the pressures that people are under, despite everything which is coming at us from around the world, we have faster jobs growth than any major advanced economy. We have workforce participation higher than any major advanced economy. Average unemployment under this Prime Minister is 3.7 per cent, compared with 5.6 per cent under those opposite. Unemployment is now lower than when we came to office. Quarterly inflation is much lower than when we came to office, and real wages growth is much higher than it was when we came to office. We are managing our economy in a responsible and methodical way, and as a consequence of that we're making welcome and encouraging progress.</para>
<para>Here the contrast couldn't be clearer. Almost two years and we don't know what their economic plan is. We don't know what their alternative policies are on the cost of living. But we do know they want people working longer for less. We do know they voted for higher inflation and lower wages. We do know the deputy leader said they would roll back our tax cuts, and we do know all about the economic insanity of their uncosted nuclear fantasy. We also know from reports today that, when the opposition leader was invited to the Business Council of Australia's annual event to give his vision for the economy, the sum total of that vision was to tell business, to beg business, to bag Labor more. That says it all. They have no ideas, no alternatives and no credibility, and that's why nobody takes them seriously on the economy.</para>
<para>We still expect the labour market to soften. We've been upfront about that. But we've seen more jobs created. We've seen inflation moderating. We've seen real wages growing. That does mean more people are working, more people are earning more and more people will keep more of what they earn. The jobs number we got today, which was remarkable, is an important part of that— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DISTINGUISHED VISITORS</title>
        <page.no>69</page.no>
        <type>DISTINGUISHED VISITORS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Schools Constitutional Convention, Meals on Wheels Australia</title>
          <page.no>69</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm pleased to inform the House that present in the gallery today are participants in the National Schools Constitutional Convention and also representatives from Meals on Wheels Australia, who are celebrating their 70th anniversary, alongside the Parliamentary Friends of Meals on Wheels, ably led by the member for Adelaide and the member for Parkes. Welcome to you all.</para>
<para>Honourable members: Hear, hear!</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</title>
        <page.no>69</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Universities</title>
          <page.no>69</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WATSON-BROWN</name>
    <name.id>300127</name.id>
    <electorate>Ryan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. Unlike you and I did, today's students don't enjoy free university, and students across the country are struggling with the cost-of-living crisis. Student debt is rising faster than it can be paid off. Student debt should be wiped. Prime Minister, will you abolish indexation on student debt or offer any other student debt relief in the May budget?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CLARE</name>
    <name.id>HWL</name.id>
    <electorate>Blaxland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for her question and recognise the interest of a number of members of the crossbench who've raised the question about reform to HECS or what we now call HELP. I also recognise that the issue has been raised with me by a number of members of the government as well. I met with the member for Jagajaga on this very issue yesterday as well as the member for Chisholm. The member for Cunningham, the member for Macnamara and the member for Bennelong have raised this with me as well. It's why I asked the accord team to look at this very issue as part of their review of our higher education system.</para>
<para>A couple of weeks ago I released the Universities Accord final report. It's a blueprint for higher education reform for the next decade and the one after that. It includes recommendations about how we make our HECS system fairer and simpler. We're looking at all of the recommendations in that report at the moment, including the recommendations around HECS, and we'll respond with the first stage of our reforms responding to that report in the next months.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Workplace Relations</title>
          <page.no>69</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr MULINO</name>
    <name.id>132880</name.id>
    <electorate>Fraser</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. What has been the response to the Albanese Labor government's workplace relations reforms, which have helped Australians earn more and keep more of what they earn?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
    <electorate>Watson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Fraser for the question. I appreciated the opportunity to be with him in his electorate only a couple of weeks ago, looking at some of the jobs programs that we've got there, because the first response that comes to workplace relations policies is actually: what's the response that's happening on the ground? We were told the response was going to be a huge increase in unemployment. That's what we were told was going to happen, and now the results are in.</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Unemployment is down to 3.7 per cent—116,000 new jobs. That's 790,000 new jobs under this Prime Minister. That's 790,000 people in a job who weren't, 790,000 people who are now earning more—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>and keeping more of what they earn under the polices of the Albanese—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Leader of the House will just pause a moment. This yelling across the chamber is not going to continue. The Treasurer and the shadow Treasurer, trust me, can take their conversation outside. They will not continue with that sort of behaviour. The noise is far too great. I'm just telling everyone: it's far too loud. The yelling's got to stop. There'll be no more yelling today, or there'll be actions. The minister will continue.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Burke</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>In those figures, wages are up, inflation is down, jobs are up, and unemployment is down, and it's in no small part—because the theory we were told, 'If you pay people more, they'll all lose their jobs,' was simply not true. It was just another excuse to try to argue for low wages.</para>
<para>But the shouting that happened earlier in the question wasn't the only anger that's happened, because the Business Council were the ones that copped it last night, we're told. In the speech from the Leader of the Opposition, it was the Business Council he was angry with, because business wasn't being angry with him at this government and business wasn't making the complaints that he wanted. So I went back and thought: When was the last time the Leader of the Opposition actually led the complaints in the parliament on the issue? When did he or his party actually ask a question about workplace relations? It would be unfair to say they've have asked me none, because they did ask one in September 2022. Now, since that time, it's not like the government has done much in workplace relations. Except for the closing loopholes bill, except for the protecting of worker entitlements bill, except for closing loopholes No. 1 and closing loopholes No. 2, absolutely nothing has been done! But, in all of that, not one question. And yet they have the audacity to get angry with businesses saying, 'Well, why aren't you doing it?' The Leader of the Opposition is making the shadow Treasurer look busy in the way he's working here.</para>
<para>So what we have is them not wanting to be upfront about what they are targeting, because we do know they have a targeted package of repeals that they want to take to the next election that they're not willing to talk about publicly in this parliament, which are targeted against higher wages, targeted against job security, targeted against closing the gender pay gap and targeted against Australian workers.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Economy</title>
          <page.no>70</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TAYLOR</name>
    <name.id>231027</name.id>
    <electorate>Hume</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. Isn't the true story behind today's data that people are working harder for longer because they can't afford to pay their bills under this government's disastrous economic policy?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the shadow Treasurer for his question. We have an extraordinary circumstance where we have the premise of that question completely counter to what the data today is actually showing. The data today shows a drop in unemployment from 4.1 per cent down to 3.7 per cent. The data today finds more than 100,000 jobs have been created in one month.</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>They get angry when you talk about jobs being created. It makes them so angry that unemployment has gone down and that wages growth is double what it was, with real wages increasing. What we have is real wages increasing, inflation moderating, unemployment heading down, productivity going up, a $78 billion deficit being replaced by a $22 billion surplus, a government that is responding and fiscal policy working with monetary policy, not against it. It stands in stark contrast to the circumstances that we inherited, with real wages going backwards, with inflation peaking at 2.1 per cent in the March 2022 quarter and with jobs not being created like the numbers that we have seen in today's data. We have reform that assists people as well, working people, including half the population who, by the way, are women, which they forgot. The gender pay gap is at its lowest level in history, of 12 per cent, and paid parental leave is being extended. It passed through the Senate on Monday. Super guarantee will be paid on paid parental leave. We'll wait and see whether they support or oppose that. They sort of opposed it for an hour. It was a bit like tax—and tax cuts are going to every single taxpayer on 1 July so people can keep more of what they are earning.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Aged Care</title>
          <page.no>70</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:54</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 Aged Care. How is the Albanese Labor government helping aged-care workers earn more and keep more what they earn? What impact are the government's policies having on improving the standard of aged care in Australia? What has been the response?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WELLS</name>
    <name.id>264121</name.id>
    <electorate>Lilley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Hawke for his question. Workers are both the beating heart and the backbone of Australia's aged-care system. That is why, from our very first day in government, we have been focused on ensuring there are more carers, with more time to care; focused on putting the nurses back into nursing homes; focused on making sure that these amazing and dedicated workers are properly valued for the crucial and skilled work that they perform. That's why we backed aged-care workers in their fight for better wages at the Fair Work Commission and we delivered a 15 per cent increase to award wage minimums for 250,000 workers—an $11.3 billion investment in the people who dedicate their working lives to caring for older Australians.</para>
<para>That increase is changing the lives of both the workers and the people that they care for. I recently met with aged-care workers and they told me about their colleague named Kylie. Kylie is a single mum, living, working and raising her family in Penrith, in the member for Lindsay's electorate. Before the 15 per cent increase in the award wage minimum, Kylie was trying to get approved for a mortgage, in order to buy a house for her and her kids. But the banks wouldn't lend to her, because, despite doing this incredibly valuable work, she wasn't paid enough. But under the Albanese Labor government that changed, and, after the pay increase on 1 July last year, Kylie has now been approved for a mortgage and been able to buy an apartment for the very first time. How amazing is that!</para>
<para>Our investment in workers like Kylie is paying dividends not just for her and her family but also for the people that they care for. Under the Albanese government, older people are receiving an additional 2.16 minutes of care every single day. We are seeing improvements in their star-ratings data, with fewer 1- and 2-star rated facilities now, and more 5-star facilities.</para>
<para>But we don't just want workers to earn more; we want them to keep more of what they earn. From 1 July, every single taxpayer, including our aged-care workers, will receive a tax cut. So not only can a personal-care worker like Kylie take home $7,300 more, every single year; they will now get a tax cut of more than $1,100 under Labor's tax cuts—almost double what they would have got from the coalition.</para>
<para>With my remaining time, can I give a shout-out to the students from the National Schools Constitutional Convention that we have here with us this afternoon, particularly to Sophie, from Aspley, who promises me she's going to give rebuttal a go—and she definitely has to, now I've shouted her out in the federal parliament for it! And, as she can see, from the standard we display here, it's really not that hard. Best of luck!</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Immigration Detention</title>
          <page.no>71</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:57</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 Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs. One of the hard-core criminals the Albanese government released from immigration detention has been revealed as a 42-year-old Cuban man previously convicted and jailed for raping a teenager. The <inline font-style="italic">Australian</inline> has reported that the minister this week removed the requirement for this rapist to wear an ankle bracelet. How many convicted rapists released by the minister are not required to wear an ankle monitor?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GILES</name>
    <name.id>243609</name.id>
    <electorate>Scullin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for her question. I remind her and I remind the House that this results from a decision of the High Court, a decision which we strongly argued against. But, like any government, we have to abide by the decisions of the court.</para>
<para>In response to that, we put in place a range of measures to secure the powers and also the resources our law enforcement agencies require to keep the community safe. As the ABF Commissioner said the other day:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… the ABF stands ready to adapt … to deliver the best outcomes for the community.</para></quote>
<para>And a big part of that was, of course, putting in place the Community Protection Board of expert law enforcement officials, to advise on the mechanisms that are available. Their expert advice means that we have the skills and information to manage these cases appropriately. These are decisions that are endorsed by the ABF Commissioner, and we respect their advice.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The minister will pause. Has the minister completed his answer? Order. The member for Holt has the call.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Administrative Appeals Tribunal</title>
          <page.no>71</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms FERNANDO</name>
    <name.id>299964</name.id>
    <electorate>Holt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Attorney-General. Why is reform of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal so vital?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Holt for her question. It's an important question. As everyone in this place is aware, under the former government the Administrative Appeals Tribunal became dysfunctional, with enormous backlogs—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order. The Attorney-General will pause. We are 10 seconds into the answer. I'm going to ask the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to cease interjecting so I can hear the answer to this question.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>As everyone in this place is aware, under the former government the Administrative Appeals Tribunal became dysfunctional, with enormous backlogs causing delays of many months and, in some areas, even years. Through active stacking and wilful neglect the former government left the AAT to rot, and Australians suffered as a result.</para>
<para>The people affected by these delays are among our most vulnerable: people relying on Centrelink, NDIS clients and veterans. I'm pleased that the legislation to abolish the AAT and replace it with a new administrative review body that is user focused, efficient, accessible, independent and fair, passed this place today.</para>
<para>I'm grateful to my friend the member for Macquarie, who chairs the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs, and thank the committee for its excellent work, thorough consultations and thoughtful report. That committee unanimously recommended that the bill pass this place. I'd also like to thank Senator Nita Green, as the Chair of the Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs, and thank her committee for its work on this important legislation.</para>
<para>This is vital reform. It will have a lasting benefit, a real benefit, for the lives of thousands of Australians—Australians who, sadly, were abandoned by the former government.</para>
<para>I've had productive conversations across the parliament with those who understand the value of these reforms and the importance of delivering on the new tribunal as a priority. Australians are relying on us to get on with the job of establishing the new Administrative Review Tribunal. We know the Liberal Party wants to delay these reforms as long as possible. It's about protecting their stack—all their Liberal mates appointed without any merit based process, just a call from the minister's office.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Economy</title>
          <page.no>72</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TAYLOR</name>
    <name.id>231027</name.id>
    <electorate>Hume</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer to the Prime Minister's previous answer, telling Australians that they have never had it so good. Prime Minister, isn't it the case that unemployment—</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">Honourable members interjecting—</inline></para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Resume your seat for a moment. We'll get back to your question. The Treasurer will cease interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Leader of the Opposition doesn't need to assist me before I call someone. The Prime Minister is rising on a point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Albanese</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Are you in charge?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The Leader of the Opposition will remain silent. When the Leader of the Opposition takes a point of order I ask everyone to be silent; I'm doing the same for the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister is raising a point of order. I want to hear what the point of order is.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Albanese</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, it goes to the standing orders that require—and the verballing that just occurred, quoting former prime minister John Howard, not me. We have very few things in common, and that comment is not one of them.</para>
<para class="italic"><inline font-style="italic">Honourable members interjecting—</inline></para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! I'm just going to say that if the shadow Treasurer is claiming that someone has said something, he's got to make sure it's accurate: not what he thinks was said, but what the record shows. That's what I'm trying to say. We will start again, and we'll ask the shadow Treasurer to begin his question.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TAYLOR</name>
    <name.id>231027</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer to the Prime Minister's previous answer, telling Australians that they've never had it better. Prime Minister, isn't it the case that unemployment today reflects Australians scrambling for extra work to pay their bills under this government's disastrous economic policies?</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I note the change in language between the first attempted question and the second, but neither of them, of course, were accurate. This is what the figures released today actually show: the unemployment—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The Shadow Treasurer has had a really good go today, so he will remain silent for the remainder of this answer and every other answer to assist the House.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>He has had, unusually for the Shadow Treasurer, a good crack today. Unfortunately, they handed the questions from the member for Deakin to him, and before he read them, he just read them out loud. I'll give you a tip, mate. Read them first. Decide how silly they are.</para>
<para>Now, the unemployment rate today went down from 4.1 to 3.7 per cent. Those opposite thinks that's bad. Who here thinks that that was good?</para>
<para>Government members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>  The unemployment rate at the election in May 2022 was four per cent—</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! No, the Prime Minister will pause. The members on my left will cease interjecting. The member for Groom and the member for Page will cease interjecting. The member for Barker will cease interjecting.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Those opposite hate jobs being created; they hate it. Total employment increased by 116,500 in a month. We think that's good. Those opposite think that's bad. Total employment increased by 437,000 over the year. We think that's good; they think that's bad. The participation rate increased.</para>
<para>Not every state has an unemployment rate with a three in front of it—I'll say that. It didn't happen when they were in government. Nationally, of course, it's happened most months except the one where it dipped up to 4.1 per cent, but it's back with a three. See if you can guess what these states have in common that have an unemployment rate with a three in front: New South Wales, 3.6—Premier Minns; Victoria, 3.9—Premier Allan; Queensland, 3.9; South Australia, 3.2—Premier Mali; and WA, 3.6. There are five states in Australia with Labor governments; all of them have an unemployment rate with a three in front. They have something in common, which is that Labor governments believe in creating jobs.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gender Equality</title>
          <page.no>73</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MILLER-FROST</name>
    <name.id>296272</name.id>
    <electorate>Boothby</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is for the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government, representing the Minister for Women. Why is it important to have women in the room where decisions are made and what are the consequences when women are not?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CATHERINE KING</name>
    <name.id>00AMR</name.id>
    <electorate>Ballarat</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Can I thank very much the member for Boothby for what is a really important question to reflect on just how important it is to have women in the room where decisions are being made. Of course, this government is very deeply focused on delivering for women. We want to make sure that happens all the way across the economy, increasing women's economic participation. We want to make sure women have greater opportunities to participate in the economic and social life of this country. That just doesn't happen by accident.</para>
<para>We are the first federal government to have a party room with women in the majority. This week, we welcomed a new woman into our ranks, the fabulous member for Dunkley, who has spent all of her working life championing some of the most vulnerable and disadvantaged women in the Dunkley community. It is so fabulous to have her here. Having women in the room matters. It matters for the way in which you make policies. It's why I'm so proud to be part of a government that has been concentrating on improving access to child care and making sure that child care is affordable, because it's not just about the importance of education for children; it is also a good economic policy. It's also why I am so proud that we not only introduced paid parental leave but have increased paid parental leave this week, as well as extending superannuation to paid parental leave, which will be absolutely critical for the retirement incomes of women.</para>
<para>But this stands, I'd have to say, in contrast to those opposite. Having women in the room matters. Having women on this side of the House absolutely has mattered when it comes to policy. In recent days, we've seen those opposite knock their most senior woman in South Australia off the top of their Senate ticket, in favour of a man who's a COVID conspiracist and, frankly, is also a Putin apologist. No wonder they're backing Russia on fuel efficiency standards. They've refused to preselect a woman for the seat of Cook. They've refused to preselect a woman for the seat of Fadden. I've lost track of what's happened in the preselection in McPherson. I very much admire the terrific woman they have over there as the member for McPherson, someone who is a good friend of mine. I'm not sure what's happening there, but so far I don't think any women have put their hands up. We've also seen that they didn't preselect a woman in Dunkley either. Actions like that actually matter. They matter for the decisions that are made around the cabinet table and they matter for the decisions that are made in the party room. I am very proud to be part of a government that is promoting the economic and social interests of women. Those opposite have got a lot to learn.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Environment</title>
          <page.no>73</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr SCAMPS</name>
    <name.id>299623</name.id>
    <electorate>Mackellar</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for the Environment and Water. Minister, last year you expanded the water trigger in our national environment laws so all forms of unconventional gas were covered by it. The gas company Tamboran Resources has approval from the Northern Territory government to start gas fracking in the Beetaloo Basin. The new water trigger very likely applies to that project, but Tamboran has not referred it to you for assessment. Minister, why haven't you used your powers to call in the Tamboran project for assessment?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PLIBERSEK</name>
    <name.id>83M</name.id>
    <electorate>Sydney</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to thank the member for Mackellar for her question. She has been a very long-term advocate for better environmental protections, and she did an enormous amount of work to strengthen the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act to broaden the water trigger to all forms of unconventional gas. I thank her for her support of the government's first tranche of changes to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, which passed this parliament at the end of last year, including the water trigger but also, of course, establishing the nature repair market.</para>
<para>Of course, as a potential decision-maker, I'm not able to comment on any individual matters that may come before me, but I want to reassure the member for Mackellar that the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water wrote to all known companies that have activities in the Beetaloo Basin, including Tamboran Resources, to inform them of their new obligations that may apply to any operations they have under the water trigger amendments. I haven't received any referral for the activities of any of those companies in the Beetaloo Basin. As I say, it's not appropriate for me, as a potential decision-maker, to offer commentary on any particular project. But, because the member for Mackellar and a number of members on this side have raised concerns, I have asked my department to provide advice to me to assure me that all companies that are operating in the Beetaloo Basin are complying with their obligations under the expanded water trigger.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>International Relations: Australia and China</title>
          <page.no>74</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr GARLAND</name>
    <name.id>295588</name.id>
    <electorate>Chisholm</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. In light of the Chinese foreign minister's visit to Australia, what progress has been made in stabilising the relationship between our two countries?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Chisholm, who understands that it's not just a matter of our relationship with the world and our place in the world. It's also, because we're a multicultural nation, about our cohesiveness as a society here. The world is of course confronting serious challenges and economic headwinds, and what happens internationally does matter at home. We know that one in four jobs in Australia are trade dependent, and this government has made it a priority for Australia to take our seat at the table, to speak out for our interests and to shape decisions, not just respond to them. It's how we get results for Australians—for jobs, for trade, for our economy and also for our national security.</para>
<para>We recently hosted all of the ASEAN leaders in Melbourne. We brought together people from across our region to promote prosperity, stability and security. The speech that President Marcos gave here was a very important one, and it followed on from the speech from Prime Minister Marape.</para>
<para>Last year, I was pleased to be the first Australian PM to visit China since 2016. We know this is one of our most important relationships, and it was good to meet foreign minister Wang Yi yesterday, following his official meetings with the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Penny Wong. It has been a constructive visit to Australia, discussing the stabilisation of our relationship and following up from my visit to China. In particular, the removal of trade impediments has been a big plus for Australian agriculture, for Australian resources and for Australian jobs, and we look forward to the interim decision on wine carrying through to a decision which will mean substantial job creation in the Hunter Valley, in the South Australian wineries and right throughout Australia.</para>
<para>Our approach has been patient. It's been calibrated and it's been deliberate. It's a mature and responsible approach that has stabilised the relationship without compromising any of our core interests. I've said that we'll cooperate where we can and we'll disagree where we must, but we'll engage in our national interest. And it is paying dividends. Minister Wang Yi's visit gave us an opportunity to reinforce our views as well about maritime security issues and other consular cases that are of concern.</para>
<para>I'm pleased that Premier Li has accepted my invitation for our leaders' meeting to occur in the coming months here in Australia. Consistent dialogue is crucial. We'll continue to engage in that patient, deliberate and calibrated matter that has defined and characterised the way that we've responded to these issues.</para>
<para>On that note, I ask that further questions be placed on the <inline font-style="italic">Notice Paper</inline>.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PARLIAMENTARY OFFICE HOLDERS</title>
        <page.no>74</page.no>
        <type>PARLIAMENTARY OFFICE HOLDERS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Speaker's Panel</title>
          <page.no>74</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Pursuant to standing order 17, I lay on the table my warrant revoking the nomination of the honourable member for Sturt to be a member of the Speaker's panel.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DOCUMENTS</title>
        <page.no>75</page.no>
        <type>DOCUMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Law Reform Commission</title>
          <page.no>75</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Presentation</title>
            <page.no>75</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present the Australian Law Reform Commission's summary report and final report into religious educational institutions and antidiscrimination laws.</para>
<para>On indulgence—No Australian should be discriminated against because of who they are or what they believe. The Australian Law Reform Commission's report that I've tabled today is not a report from the government. It is advice to the government, and we will continue to consider it. The government will seek to enhance protections in antidiscrimination law in a way that brings Australians together.</para>
<para>Just as Commonwealth law already prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, gender, sexuality, disability and age, no-one should be discriminated against because of their faith. Equally, no student or member of staff should be discriminated against because of who they are. At the same time, religious schools must continue to be able to build and maintain communities of faith. The government recognises and respects the right of parents to send their kids to a religious school because of the beliefs and values they teach their children.</para>
<para>Over many months, we've been talking to a range of religious institutions, community organisations, unions and legal experts. We thank them for their engagement, and we thank the Australian Law Reform Commission for its work. The government is seeking an enduring solution that strengthens protections for all of us—for students, teachers and people of faith—and that's why bipartisan support for solutions is essential.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE</title>
        <page.no>75</page.no>
        <type>MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Energy</title>
          <page.no>75</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I have received a letter from the honourable member for Lindsay proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The energy affordability crisis facing Australians thanks to this Government's policies</para></quote>
<para>I call upon those honourable members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places—</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs McINTOSH</name>
    <name.id>281513</name.id>
    <electorate>Lindsay</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We know how much the Prime Minister loves to attend Taylor Swift and Katy Perry concerts, but you may not know that he also must be in with the Backstreet Boys, because it seems to be that they wrote a song for him: '10,000 Promises'. Just listen to the lyrics:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Now I see you're just somebody</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Who wastes all my time and money</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">What a lie, you and I</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">What about your</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Your 10, 000 promises?</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That you gave to me</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Your 10, 000 promises</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That you promised me</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Once I could handle the truth</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">When the truth was you and I, ooh</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">But time after time all the promises</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Turned out to be all lies …</para></quote>
<para><inline font-style="italic">An opposition member interjecting</inline>—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs McINTOSH</name>
    <name.id>281513</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I could sing it! That would be great. If you could multiply the Prime Minister's 97 broken promises to reduce energy bills by $275 by Australia's population of 26 million in 2022, it is more than 10,000 broken promises. It is, in fact, 2.5 billion broken promises. Imagine the songs of heartbreak in that. It's an entire album called 'Albo and Bowen's bungled and broken promises'—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I remind you to use correct titles for members in this parliament.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs McINTOSH</name>
    <name.id>281513</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It's a mixtape, 2022—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Correct the record, please.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs McINTOSH</name>
    <name.id>281513</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It's something we can all listen to travelling from our homes to Canberra—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Member for Lindsay, I want you to go back to where you used the unparliamentary term and put the correct term in.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs McINTOSH</name>
    <name.id>281513</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>'The Prime Minister and Minister for Climate Change and Energy's bungled and broken promises—a mix tape, 2022 to 2025'. That sounds better! It just rolls off the tongue! It's something we can all listen to travelling from our homes to Canberra, except no-one can afford the Prime Minister's album in this cost-of-living crisis.</para>
<para>From coast to coast, across every stretch of our country, people are suffering. Whether in Lilydale, Shepparton, Hamilton, Mount Gambier, Norwood, Whyalla, Geraldton, Bunbury, Mandurah, Burnie, Launceston, Strathpine, Rockhampton—we know these places—Albury, Narellan or Sutherland, no-one is immune to the broken promises that have left people paying hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars more for their electricity bills thanks to the Prime Minister and the energy minister's bungled energy policies.</para>
<para>How do I know this? Because it's real life. Member on this side are on the ground talking to their people; listening, caring and fighting for them. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition recently announced that Seeley, a business in her electorate, will close operations and cut 125 jobs. This is due to gas issues caused by Victorian Labor. What a surprise! More Labor policies across the country hurting everyday Australians, with jobs gone. Central Queensland MPs, like the members for Capricornia and Flynn, are worried about what happens to workers when their power plants close and how Central Queensland will keep the lights on.</para>
<para>In my own electorate, a Penrith food charity which provides up to 400 meals six times a week is now struggling itself and at threat of closing its doors. Can you believe that? A food charity that is feeding people in need is at threat of closing. When I asked the minister for energy this week about Mama Lana's looking at closing down due to their energy bills increasing by $900, he didn't care one bit. Mama Lana's feeds people right across the Penrith area and also those in the member for McMahon's patch, yet he laughed it off. He didn't even know which energy company looked after my area, then proceeded to pat himself on the back.</para>
<para>What about the 30 per cent, or $1,000, owed to Western Sydney families to meet this government's $275 broken promise? We know that the Prime Minister in particular likes to pretend that they never made this promise, that it never happened. The problem is, he had a press pack with him, and he looked at the camera, straight into the eyes and hearts of everyday Australians, and said: 'Vote for me. I have your backs. And in return your electricity bills will be $275 cheaper.' When asked by a journalist at the very first press conference whether he thought it was possible, the Prime Minister said, 'I don't think; I know, because we've done the modelling.' So, not only did the Prime Minister say it 97 times; he backed himself with the modelling. You just can't make a commitment like that disappear, as much as you try to ignore it. Have people on this side forgotten that promise?</para>
<para>Opposition members: No!</para>
<para>An opposition member: Not on your nellie!</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs McINTOSH</name>
    <name.id>281513</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>No—not on your nellie! Have the Australian people forgotten this promise?</para>
<para>Opposition members: No!</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs McINTOSH</name>
    <name.id>281513</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>But what about Labor members' own constituents? Have they forgotten this promise?</para>
<para>Opposition members: No!</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs McINTOSH</name>
    <name.id>281513</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I don't think they've forgotten either, because in Parramatta, in Macquarie, in Gilmore, in Whitlam, in Blaxland, in McMahon, in Chifley, in Greenway and in Werriwa they are paying over $1,000 more for their electricity. Some people are really hurting. Over 60,000 people in New South Wales are on energy hardship payments, which is an alarming 82 per cent increase on the 2021-22 figure. The drop in the default market offer did not reverse the damage that has been done to every Australian.</para>
<para>But this isn't the Albanese government's only haphazard policy that is harming people. The energy minister is rushing through fuel efficiency standards. So, the tradies who need to get in their utes to get to job sites early in the morning—to build new homes in this housing crisis, to build the hospitals and roads we need to contend with population pressures—are experiencing a tradie tax. But don't take my word for it. Garth Butler, the principal dealer at Penrith Toyota, said this about the tradie tax: 'The rushed-in fuel efficiency standards will definitely have an effect on our business. Most manufacturers won't be able to meet the targets. They will have to pay the fine and that cost will be passed on to the buyers.' If you ask a tradie, 'Do you want to pay nearly $100,000 for a ute?' they'll say, 'No way.' And it will hurt those in our community who rely on utility vehicles to get to their work and back home again. Penrith is full of tradies, and they travel across Sydney to do their work.</para>
<para>As an Aussie tradie listens to their copy of the Prime Minister's bungled-policies mix tape 2022 to 2025 on their way to work at 5:00 in the morning, they're going to go to a track halfway through the playlist. This is a playlist of 97 songs—a song for every broken promise—and this particular song is 'The Honeymoon Is Over', by The Cruel Sea:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Oh, it ain't no fun no more</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I don't know what to say</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The honeymoon is over, baby</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">It's never gonna be that way again</para></quote>
<para>Well, it certainly isn't going to be that way again under this government, and the honeymoon is certainly over for the Prime Minister, even while he continues to tell Australians they have never had it better.</para>
<para>How is that true, when manufacturers are closing their doors because gas has been torn away from them and they just can't afford to stay open? How is it true that people have never had it better when hospitality venues across the country and in every single one of our electorates are closing their doors because there are just not enough customers and they can't keep the lights on? How is it true that Australians have never had it better when they're paying 37 per cent more for their electricity bills? And how is it true that Australians have never had it better when our tradies are being whacked, not only with higher material costs but with a higher ute prices, too? It is extraordinary that right across the country, whether you're a tradie, whether you're a farmer or whether you're a mum and dad just struggling to put food on the table, you are being hit by the Albanese Labor government's bungled energy policies.</para>
<para>Australians want the truth, so I'm going to finalise my MPI by saying, as one of the Prime Minister's own former Labor colleagues, from Midnight Oil, once sang, 'Why won't you tell me the truth?' Why won't this Prime Minister tell Australians the truth?</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms KEARNEY</name>
    <name.id>LTU</name.id>
    <electorate>Cooper</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It gives me great pleasure to speak on this topic today. It's a fantastic opportunity, because this matter of public importance is one that impacts each and every Australian. It impacts the cost of living, our climate and environment, and it's a matter that Labor actually understands and gets and doesn't make up fanciful stories about. It's a matter Labor takes seriously. It's a matter that Labor is taking action on. So I thank member for raising this topic. Because goodness knows it's not a topic the opposition understands. It's not a topic the opposition takes seriously. It's not a topic the opposition took action on or is capable of taking action on.</para>
<para>Let's start with what those opposite did when they were in government. They had the chance to create a sensible energy policy, one that powered Australia into the future, helped ease the cost of living, and helped do our part to reduce global emissions and fight back against the changing climate. What did the Liberals and nationals do in their decade of government? Well, it's a bit hard to answer, because it's hard to pinpoint anything they actually did. In their decade in government those opposite had 22 energy policies; 22 policies that did not deliver for the Australian people; 22 policies that did not deliver for our environment; 22 policies that did not empower our nation. They flipped and they blocked. Their approach to energy was so chaotic that they even dumped their own Prime Minister over it.</para>
<para>The far right climate denying from the Liberals and nationals ripped up the National Energy Guarantee, setting Australia back years in our transition to a clean energy future. What did they do next? They had the failed underwriting new generation investment program, a program that did not deliver one single dollar to a project or one kilowatt of electricity to the market. After that we had the gas led recovery. But this was not a recovery; it was actually gaslighting. It gaslit Australian people. It failed to deliver affordable energy to our domestic energy market. It failed to deliver power to our industries. It failed to deliver anything whatsoever to the Australian people.</para>
<para>It was in this context that the Australian people voted those opposite out, because they could not address the challenges of the times, because they could not govern like adults, because they could offer no solutions—zero solutions—to support everyday working people during some of the most challenging times of the century.</para>
<para>When Labor came to power, we inherited a mess. But unlike those opposite, Labor is a government that actually takes action. We are a government that, when faced with a problem, can work together, come up with a solution and implement it to deliver for Australians. Labor understands energy bills are one of the biggest challenges facing Australian families and small businesses. With energy supplies impacted by the war in Ukraine and supply chain disruptions, Labor is acting to not only shore up our energy supplies but deliver cost-of-living relief and secure the green energy future that we need. The Albanese Labor government has delivered energy price relief rebates to more than five million households and one million small businesses to provide hundreds of dollars off bills. That's six million households and businesses that we have helped, compared to zero from those opposite.</para>
<para>Unlike those opposite, who were at war with the states and territories, this Labor government has worked collaboratively to reduce power bills. The relief builds on government's earlier market interventions to limit coal and gas price increases. Placing a temporary price cap on new domestic gas sales by east coast producers has helped keep wholesale gas contract prices under control, something that we know those opposite would never ever have been able to do. Australians know it's working. It's why the Australian Energy Regulator's <inline font-style="italic">Wholesale markets </inline><inline font-style="italic">quarterly</inline> report shows that average wholesale electricity prices were less than half those in the same period last year.</para>
<para>Even with all this, those opposite maintain their bizarre, crazy, fantastical position and opposition. It's beyond belief. But, when you look at their voting record, it makes sense, because this is an opposition that has voted not only against cheaper energy prices but against all cost-of-living relief measures—all negativity, zero plan. Australians know this. While Labor is delivering more targeted tax cuts for working Australians, those opposite are voting against them. While Labor is building more social and affordable homes, those opposite are saying, 'Nuh.' When Labor is laying the foundations for the green energy future, those opposite have their heads firmly in the sand. They're still being held captive by the ideologically driven right flank of their coalition. The Leader of the Nationals has actually called for a pause on renewables, the cheapest form of energy.</para>
<para>Unlike those opposite, Labor sees that the transition to renewable energy is not only necessary but a golden economic opportunity. Australia stands as the most abundantly renewable-resource-rich nation globally, with more sunlight hitting our landmass than any other country. As a government, we are charging full steam ahead towards becoming a renewable energy superpower. Since being in power, Labor has simply got on with the job of helping us achieve this goal. We ended the climate change wars by enshrining our national emissions reduction targets into law and provided certainty to Australian businesses and investors, which they thank us for heartily. We announced new vehicle efficiency standards, giving Australians more choices of cheaper, more efficient cars to run. We've legislated our $20 billion Rewiring the Nation fund and achieved funding deals for vital new energy infrastructure with New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania and Western Australia, providing essential upgrades to the national grid. We are rolling out 400 community batteries around Australia to help Australian homes harness the cost savings of solar energy. This is what governments do if they take energy supply, affordability and sustainability seriously. We have a plan, and we're implementing it. Compare it with the opposition's decade of doing absolutely nothing.</para>
<para>When we hear about all these amazing achievements of the Albanese Labor government and the opposition are still saying no, the obvious question becomes: what on earth is their plan? We know they don't like renewables. We know they don't want to provide cost-of-living relief. We know they can't be trusted to come up with a coherent energy policy. So what do they want to do? Well, lo and behold, the best those opposite can come up with is nuclear power. This is not a renewable resource. It is outdated, archaic and unbelievably expensive. Their so-called serious alternative plan is to build massive nuclear reactors right across the country, risking our pristine environment, our beautiful oceans, our communities and our schools with the threat of radioactive waste. It's not a plan; it's a fantasy. It's a fantasy because it would not only cost the country billions and billions of dollars, driving up the cost of energy for every hardworking Australian, but take decades and decades to build.</para>
<para>As we have heard, they have a plan for nuclear energy but they haven't got a plan for location or for disposal of the waste and don't know how much it's going to cost. That is not a plan. They have no plan to power Australia. They have no plan to protect our climate. They have no plan to address the cost of living. They have no plan for Australian families, businesses or communities.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELL</name>
    <name.id>282981</name.id>
    <electorate>Moncrieff</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para><inline font-style="italic">How the Grinch Stole Christmas!</inline> is Dr Seuss's story of an ill-tempered grump who goes on a mission. The grumpy, old, green Grinch plots to ruin Christmas for the Whos in the village of Whoville. Australians know that story. Aided by his pet dog, Max, he meticulously designs a bright red suit to disguise himself as Santa Claus, and he breaks into the Whos' homes on Christmas Eve while they sleep to steal everything they own, right down to their last crumb of food, and throw it off the nearby mountain.</para>
<para>What we have on the other side is the narrator and author of the energy story in this country, the Prime Minister and the energy minister, who are not just ruining Christmas for families, but every single quarter when they get their power bills. The energy Grinch effect comes as no surprise to households and families who have been suffering bill after bill under this Labor government after being promised $275 in energy relief. Instead, what do they get? What have they gotten? A government that they trusted and elected on the promise that they have delivered a shortfall of up to $1,027 to households. That is an increase—not decrease of $275—an increase of up to 39 per cent. Further, around 120,000 households are now on a financial hardship arrangement with their energy retailer. That's 59 per cent more than when the coalition was in government. That's 120,000 households, Australian families, who are now on a financial hardship arrangement with their energy retailer.</para>
<para>What is happening in South-East Queensland? On the Gold Coast? In Brisbane? The Sunshine Coast? $622 is how much the average increase is for South-East Queenslanders. That's an increase of 36 per cent to their power bills. In New South Wales, bills have increased by up to $752. That's a 37 per cent increase. In South Australia, electricity bills have increased by up to $696, up 34 per cent. How do South Australians afford it? In Victoria, electricity bills have gone up to $275, an increase of 20 per cent. The proof is in the pudding, in the numbers. In the Australian energy fairytale, right now, that those opposite live in, Dr Seuss and the Grinch are not listening to Australian families and businesses who desperately want power bills reduced.</para>
<para>Australians know that the character of the Grinch is certainly audacious. He's got his own internal narrative going. His narrative is that he believes he's true. He believes his way is the right way. In the movie the Grinch tries to unconvincingly talk up his wins many times with humour, with sarcasm, in a loud voice that changes with his mood. Yet in many jurisdictions we know that energy prices are still going up under his watch, under this energy minister's watch.</para>
<para>In the book that I'm talking about, and the movie, the Grinch and Dr Seuss refuse to admit that their 2025 power price promise is dead in the water. It's lying at the bottom of the mountain, smashed to smithereens, unable to be put together as a promise. Those opposite have already ruined one Christmas for Australians and they likely will again next Christmas, with high power prices. The PM and the energy minister owe Australians an unreserved apology for giving false hope that they would deliver on their promise to make life easier, when in truth life is now harder than ever before for everyday Australians. The Grinch energy effect I've described is well underway in this country, and Australians are left dreaming about the end of that movie where all is well and he abandons his isolation as has something to celebrate at Christmas with the Whos, which would be a $275 reduction in power bills for Australian families and businesses.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PERRETT</name>
    <name.id>HVP</name.id>
    <electorate>Moreton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I listened intensely to the member for Lindsay and the member for Moncrieff talk about the matter of public importance today, which is about the energy affordability crisis facing Australians. The member for Lindsay tried to put into my leader's mouth words that he never said. But she ignored the words coming out of her leader's mouth. We've just had a 15-minute presentation from those opposite, and not a single mention of their great, 23rd energy policy—nuclear. In fact, the member for Lindsay finished 45 seconds early. She would rather say nothing about her great policy then mention it in her MPI—unbelievable! Forty-five seconds of silence is better than their one policy—incredible! And the closest the member for Moncrieff came to talking about her leader was when she spoke about the Grinch. That's the only time she came close to him. It's unbelievable!</para>
<para>I think there is an energy problem in households. I know; I've been talking to people in my community for a long time. It didn't just start in May 2022; we know it's been going for a long time. I wonder if a government having 22 energy policies in a decade might be something to do with it, where they put political lines before power lines, where they put culture wars before serving customers—that might be part of it. But that's history. Our job is to solve the current crisis as best we can.</para>
<para>The member for Dickson's lightbulb moment—nuclear—will never power a single lightbulb; we know that. And it's not going to help people right now. After that wasted decade of culture wars, of Abbott knocking off Turnbull over energy policies—we've seen that waste, and we're not going to do that again. But for those opposite to cling to nuclear as if it is a solution, and to then have a matter of public importance talking about energy affordability and not mention nuclear—they are hung by their own petard. It is incredible they would not mention it. The only renewable resource they believe in over there is ignorance. They're going back into a culture war rather than talking in a fair dinkum way about energy.</para>
<para>We know, because we listen to the experts, that the cheapest form of energy is renewable. They can badmouth the CSIRO all they like—and wasn't that a great slap-down of the opposition leader by the actual scientists? I saw a couple of those opposite at the Science Meets Parliament event last night who'd wandered in by mistake from the brewers event or something, saying, 'Who are these people, these scientists with all their facts and figures and solving the problems of the world with actual things rather than cultural wars?'</para>
<para>Tony Abbott, for all his faults, was a conviction politician, and used energy as a way to knock off Malcolm Turnbull. We saw that in <inline font-style="italic">Nemesis</inline> writ large, and all the damage inflicted on the Australian people because of that culture war. The member for Dickson is not a conviction politician; he's a confection politician. He confects outrage. He offers no viable solutions. His go-to setting is thuggish behaviour; we know that. And his go-to position is to say no. That's it.</para>
<para>We heard no mention from the two speakers on that side so far of their 23rd energy policy. I'll just point out for the sakes of the member for Moncrieff and the member for Lindsay that their policy, their nuclear solution, will take 20 years to deliver. It will cost Australian taxpayers $387 billion. Guess what? That's a lot of money. And that's without answering all those critical questions: where's it going to be located? Where's the waste disposal? How is it going to be regulated? Minor things! But I didn't hear the member for Moncrieff or the member for Lindsay mention, 'We want nuclear reactors in our electorates.'</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PERRETT</name>
    <name.id>HVP</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>There are a few speakers coming after me; I know the representative for Bundaberg will want something on the—what's the river going through Bundaberg? You'll need a lot of water when you have a big nuclear reactor, so I'm sure that they will announce that when they start speaking. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr GILLESPIE</name>
    <name.id>72184</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's great to talk about our electricity system and the dreams of the other side. They have fallen for the dream of this renewable energy superpower hook, line and sinker. We have so much more solar resource than anyone else. Well, I hate to disappoint them, but the capacity factor of solar systems in Australia is only 24 per cent. That means we would only be a renewable energy superpower, if we were based on solar, 24 per cent of the time. The rest of the time we'd have blackouts. And the capacity factor of wind is about 40 per cent, just like it is on the rest of the planet. If you want to run a whole system using intermittently- and randomly-generating, incredibly diluted energy systems that use more minerals and essential supplies that we need to use in other parts of our economy—it's wasted on a system that has a lifespan of 20 years maximum—you are dreaming. You are burning up Australia's wealth by producing an incredibly expensive energy system. That's what a renewable energy superpower would look like—lots of blackouts and ridiculously expensive electricity. And we wouldn't be able to run our cities. We wouldn't be able to run our economies.</para>
<para>We would have renewable sewerage that would only work when the system is generating energy. We would have renewable electric trains that would only work when it's sunny and windy. For these things called cities, with 4½ million people—I know you all go to sleep at night and turn your lights off. In New South Wales there are seven gigawatts of energy, alternating current of the right frequency and voltage, in the wires all the time, and similarly in Melbourne. That amount that is always there is called baseload. Renewables that only work 24 or 40 per cent maximum time can't deliver a baseload energy system. Germany has tried. Texas has tried. The grids around England and Europe have all tried. They've spent trillions of euros, US dollars, Canadian dollars. We have spent billions and billions already, and we're just going to waste more, because it's the system that delivers your energy, not the generator.</para>
<para>Sure, renewable energy should be cheap, because it's only available when it's perfectly sunny or windy. I wouldn't want to pay too much for it. But your grid costs go through the roof because the amount of land you have to take up goes up exponentially. You destroy nature. You destroy farmland. Your grid goes up because you need all these unnecessary grids that will only be carrying electricity 24 per cent of the time at best. Lots of times they'll be carrying none. You've just signed off on $9 billion to expand unnecessary grids. Seveny-five per cent of the time most of them are coming from big solar farms way out west. Seveny-five per cent of the time there won't be any electricity because there is no solar energy. But let's go and spend $90 billion anyhow! Is that sensible? You've got to wake up. The system is what costs you money, not the generation. And that's only one thing.</para>
<para>You've also got to put the full system levelised cost into your calculations, which means the cost of all the batteries; the cost of all the grids; the cost of building it every 15 to 20 years; the cost of destroying virgin bush and land, of destroying animals—the eagles—and of destroying nature at sea and on land. That is why it's expensive.</para>
<para>It's a subsidy merry-go-round. We are now subsidising solar and wind with large generating certificates, renewable generating certificates. We are now subsidising the cost of energy with bill relief. And hey presto! All of a sudden New South Wales and Victoria have recognised you need baseload power, so now they're subsidising coal. We should get rid of the whole subsidy merry-go-round and let people called engineers run our grids, rather than pie-in-the-sky academics who think we're going to be a superpower by destroying our energy system. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr CHARLTON</name>
    <name.id>I8M</name.id>
    <electorate>Parramatta</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Lyne is a serious person who has thought a lot about the issue of nuclear power in this country. I respect his advocacy on this important issue. But I also feel sorry for him, because he's right. He's right that the fundamental problem we have in the Australian electricity grid is the need to have power that can firm up renewables. We need to have power when the sun isn't shining and the wind isn't blowing. He's exactly right about that.</para>
<para>But here's the problem. The Liberal Party solution has moved precisely away from that solution. They have a situation now where they're proposing baseload nuclear power in conventional nuclear power stations. That is not a type of power that firms up renewables. It's a type of power that you can't turn on and off and that you can't scale up and down. Now that they have abandoned the small modular reactor pie-in-the-sky proposal in favour of conventional nuclear power, the type of power they are proposing is exactly the type of power that we do not need in Australia. Unfortunately all of his arguments—his correct analysis of the problem that we have in Australia—are not tailored to the solution that his party is now proposing.</para>
<para>Friends, nuclear power is not a new proposal in Australia. It's a proposal that's been around for a long time. Since it's now being raised seriously as an alternative proposal by the opposition, it's worth thinking about that history of nuclear power in Australia. The first serious nuclear power proposal in Australia came in 1970. The then Gorton-led coalition government proposed a 500-megawatt nuclear power station. They were serious about it. They set aside $2½ million in the budget, they selected a site in Jervis Bay in New South Wales, they built an access road and they put powerlines into the site. They were going to build a nuclear reactor in New South Wales.</para>
<para>There was just one problem, friends. They got a bit ahead of themselves. They built all the site security and they put in the access road, but they hadn't waited for the Treasury analysis. That Treasury analysis came 12 months later. The Treasury analysis showed in 1971 that building that nuclear reactor would be up to 10 times more expensive than the alternative of a coal plant. Sure enough, very quickly thereafter, the project was shelved. They quietly filled in the access road and cut the power to the site.</para>
<para>We didn't hear much more about nuclear power until a couple of decades later. That came in 2007, when John Howard is Prime Minister. His back is up against the wall and he's going into an election having done nothing about climate change. He needs a policy. So he releases the taskforce report by Ziggy Switkowski saying that Australia should build up to 25 reactors by 2050. He takes that policy to the 2007 election. This time the policy isn't undone by Treasury, friends. He doesn't make the mistake of asking Treasury this time, of course—smart fellow. This time the policy is undone by his colleagues. John Howard, in the middle of the 2007 election campaign, has a nuclear policy.</para>
<para>One by one his candidates, in seats around the country, were asked at press conferences whether they would be happy to have a nuclear reactor in their electorate. You could see the blood draining out of their faces. You could see their political lives flashing before their eyes. One after the other they distanced themselves from their Prime Minister's own policy. In the 2007 election we had no less than 22 coalition candidates distancing themselves from John Howard's nuclear policy. Safe to say, straight after that election, nuclear policy was ditched by the coalition and we didn't hear about it for a long time—until today, friends. Here we are, back—the third chapter in the Liberals' flirtation with nuclear power, pushed by the right wing and pushed by Barnaby Joyce from back in 2019. Morrison didn't want to go anywhere near it. Morrison tried to kick it to the kerb.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>There's a point of order from the member for Hinkler.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Pitt</name>
    <name.id>148150</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member should address members by their correct titles.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>He's no longer a member.</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>My apologies. When referring to members of the House please use correct titles.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Dr CHARLTON</name>
    <name.id>I8M</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Morrison didn't want a bar of this. Morrison was politically toxic enough himself without having yellowcake on top of that, so he kicked it to the kerb. But unfortunately the right wing just kept going. Now they want dozens of nuclear reactors right across Australia. The problem is that it's not a policy that has ever worked or a serious solution to our energy issues.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PITT</name>
    <name.id>148150</name.id>
    <electorate>Hinkler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I think it's time in this debate we get some facts on the table. Here are a few. If we're talking about increases in electricity costs under the Labor government, here are some samples: for Ausgrid in New South Wales, since the Labor government came to power, an increase of 29.5 per cent; for Endeavour Energy in New South Wales, an increase of 37.34 per cent; for Essential Energy in New South Wales, an increase of 30.5 per cent; for Energex in the south-east of Queensland, an increase of 35.73 per cent; and for SA Power Networks in South Australia, an increase of 33.51 per cent. They are facts.</para>
<para>That is an increase of over 30 per cent in the cost of electricity at a time when people can least afford it. That is not helpful for the Australian people. I literally have people who have jobs who are living in cars. They can't afford to pay their rent; they can't pay their power bills; they can't buy food.</para>
<para>This is a challenge that is across the board. But when we look at the proposal from those opposite, no-one is actually considering the cost—the proper cost. Look at some of the correspondence, the discussions and the media reports in recent times. There was a piece by James Morrow in the <inline font-style="italic">Daily Telegraph</inline>, with numbers from energy economist Aidan Morrison, where it was identified that the cost increase that hadn't been considered and wasn't included in Labor's policy was some $121 billion—he missed it by that much!</para>
<para>The Minister for Climate Change and Energy is the Maxwell Smart of the federal parliament! He has missed it by that much. But, unfortunately, there's no Agent 99 to rush in and save the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. There is no-one to help him.</para>
<para>I hear the member for Moreton—and I love following the member for Moreton on an MPI—screaming about the proposed costs for nuclear. 'Three hundred and something billion dollars!' the member for Moreton screams at the sky. Where did that number come from? There's only one source. It was the Minister for Climate Change and Energy.</para>
<para>He can't get this right with literally years of preparation. It's $120 billion that you're out, when the cost of electricity has increased by more than 30 per cent across the board and half of the retail price is in transmission. That's a rough-and-ready number. About 50 per cent of the cost is in transmission. And what is the proposal from those opposite to keep prices down? To build 28,000 kilometres of additional transmission lines. That will go onto the bills of electricity consumers in this country. It is very straightforward; it is simple maths; that is how it works. There is a regulated rate of return that is guaranteed for transmission infrastructure, and the proposal from the federal Labor Party is to build 28,000 kilometres of transmission lines because they can't get the intermittent wind and solar factories to work—because they physically don't!</para>
<para>You cannot have something which, as the member for Lyne pointed out, has a utilisation rate of 22 per cent and expect that it will work all the time. It is at 100 per cent, or at times it is at none. That is the reality; that is what it does. Wind is the same.</para>
<para>If we look at the proposals—even the Minister for Resources has said in a statement that the cost for intermittent wind and solar, or what it actually requires, is nine times more resources than an equivalent megawatt of gas. So the proposal from those opposite is that you need nine times more mining, nine times more people working and nine times the downstream processing, and somehow that is cheaper than a per-megawatt gas capacity.</para>
<para>It's been a while since I was at high school, as I'm sure you'd be aware, but I'm quite confident that if it's nine times higher, it's not cheaper. If it is nine times higher, it is not cheaper by any means. Once again, we have a Labor Party that has missed it by that much. The problem in this debate, across the country and with the policy of the federal Labor governments is that that miss is paid for by the Australian taxpayer, the Australian electricity consumer and, more importantly, Australian businesses who will not be competitive. How can you be competitive internationally if your price is far higher than what your competitors are paying in another country? No-one will invest here. We have seen project after project withdraw from this country because they cannot be competitive.</para>
<para>Once again, we have a Minister for Climate Change and Energy who I think—I shouldn't really call him or compare him to Maxwell Smart, because I think that's unfair to Maxwell Smart; he got a lot more things right with support from Agent 99 than this minister for energy. When you have people like the former ANSTO chief backing up nuclear, I think that's a pretty good endorsement.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LAWRENCE</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
    <electorate>Hasluck</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Here we have another unguided missile by those opposite. The very first thing is describing a crisis. They've very conveniently forgotten that it's a crisis that we have inherited as a consequence of their lack of action. They had 22 policies around energy. They landed not a single one. Four gigawatts leaving the grid, with only one gigawatt coming back online to the energy market. What an utter disgrace and the utter contempt you have for every Australian, standing here today trying to point the finger at us for an energy affordability crisis. Those opposite understand the time it takes to land good policy. It took them 10 years and they didn't achieve anything.</para>
<para>Let's look at exactly what we have already embarked upon. Not only is it a case of understanding the affordability of energy, understanding the market as a whole and the cost-of-living pressures generally being experienced by all households. We've done plenty of that already, from tax cuts to cheaper medicines, more affordable child care. We're working hard to look at the whole problem. On energy, we have worked to introduce an energy price relief rebate. But for those opposite who talk about their concern for households being able to afford the bill, what did they do when that bill was before the House? They voted against it, because they actually don't care. They liked the squeeze because it gives them some weird and quite uncomfortable relevance in this place to better argue about something. If they cared they would have supported that rebate that went to five million households and some million small businesses for energy bill relief.</para>
<para>It goes further. It was quite ironic that they not once mentioned nuclear in terms of their own policy. The last speaker, the member for Hinkler, spoke about it in terms of what we said. But it's very cute that not one person yet and—I hope the next speaker proves me wrong—is prepared to talk to their nuclear energy policy as a way of addressing energy affordability. It's quite a joke. They're talking about four or five potential reactors around the country. Even if we take the member for Hinkler's suggestions that our quotes which have come not just from the minister but through government agencies who have done the research with the scientists sitting beside them, even if is it is not correct, that that estimate of around $364 million is accurate, even if we just take the UAEs, around $36 billion and multiply it by four or five, we're looking at $180 billion.</para>
<para>That does not make for an affordable household bill. That's going to be household energy bill 500 per cent higher than what they experience now. They're completely delusional if they think this is a way of addressing today's household cost of living pressures. Instead, we know that industry, businesses, are completely committed to the transition to a renewable energy future. Already we are sitting at around 38 per cent powered by renewable energy. Tasmania is a case in point. The ACT is a case in point. We are inundated with industry talking to us to be able to speak to the appetite to able to jump on board towards a renewable future.</para>
<para>The Clean Energy Council, Boundless Earth, the Heavy Industry Low Carbon Transition Cooperative Research Centre, Beyond Zero Emissions, the Australian Hydrogen Council, the Future Batteries Industry, Fortescue green energy—there are so many people, and sitting behind some fantastic industries, businesses and research centres, that are already on board with this. Let's not forget that the Minister for the Environment and Water has already ticked off 45 approvals for renewable energy projects that have all powered 2.5 million homes, and she has another 128 projects in front of her.</para>
<para>We talk about let the market decide. They are deciding, and this is exactly the direction where they see their future, where they see commerciality, and where they see a way of being able to have a win for consumers, for households and for their industry and business. We're backing in that good judgement. We're backing it in by setting the right targets, with our safeguard mechanism, with our ability to be able to enshrine targets that are meaningful, that companies can work towards, and better send a signal that this is a country to invest in because there is surety that this is the path where heading on; we're not backflipping and suddenly dropping what is the absolute sustainable future for this nation.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WOLAHAN</name>
    <name.id>235654</name.id>
    <electorate>Menzies</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the speakers who've come before me, including the member for Hasluck. The member for Hasluck sort of gives the game away, when MPIs like this talk about serious topics and she's goading the coalition to come up with a talking point or a corflute for an election. You said, 'Please, please mention nuclear', because you're salivating for that to be used in an election campaign. Well, Australians expect better than that. They expect the government, not the opposition in waiting—maybe one day, but you're the government—to be focusing on their needs. Energy isn't just one of those other niche areas. It is fundamental to our economy and indeed fundamental to human life. The whole history and the heart of human progress has been linked to energy. Energy is key to wealth, health, nutrition, infrastructure and life expectancy. And this idea that we can play politics with that key fundamental input to our society and productivity and see manufacturing industries go from this country overseas and import those products back in and say that we feel good about ourselves—well, shame on you. Shame on you for turning that serious debate into one of cute campaign politics.</para>
<para>We need to improve productivity in this country. If we don't, there are only two other solutions: cut government spending—government programs—or raise taxes. That's the alternative. And if you want to raise productivity, there are three key levers. There's technology, and as one member over here, who has some knowledge of technology, said, that's not coming from this place; that's coming from the private sector. And then there are energy and industrial relations. And you've given up on productivity increasing, on industrial relations. You've made it harder; you've made it worse. So we're left with energy, which flows through to every business, every small business, every household and every section of our economy.</para>
<para>Those who spoke previously noted that this isn't just about productivity in the economy; it's about households and how they're struggling now with the cost of living. Energy bills, next to food and the mortgage, are some of the most expensive things you can open an envelope for. That's why 120,000 households are on financial hardship arrangements with their energy retailer. In Victoria, my home state, electricity bills have gone up to $275, up by 20 per cent. That's better than in many other states. So, Labor has fallen short of its election commitments.</para>
<para>And promises do matter. No-one forced the Prime Minister, or the then opposition, to make the promise of a $275 reduction.</para>
<para>A government member: By next year!</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WOLAHAN</name>
    <name.id>235654</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>And I note the interjection, 'By next year!' That's not going to happen. You know that. We know that. That's not going to happen. But if that makes you feel better, I will add that to the claim.</para>
<para>We've had a 40 per cent increase in power bills across this nation—or 39 per cent, to be precise—and you said, 'Well, that's not our fault; it's the war in Ukraine.' Yet that invasion occurred on 24 February 2022, and right up until 18 May—mere days before the election—that promise was maintained. If that was the factor—not a factor, but the factor—then why was that promise maintained months after the invasion started? And then you got some potential good news, when the regulator said that in some areas there was a potential drop of 0.4, to 7.1, and champagne corks were popped. We heard it many times here in question time. Suddenly it's as if there's no more war in Ukraine; that's all on the government. So, suddenly, when there's good news, it's your doing, but when there's bad news, it's someone else's fault. Well, news flash: when you become the government you're responsible for the good news and the bad news. You can't cherrypick and just take the things that are good. You must step up and be responsible. I recall the Prime Minister, the then opposition leader, saying he would step up, he would take responsibility. We heard that again and again and again.</para>
<para>We're committed to this transition from a coal based economy. We're committed to that, and it's not easy. But let's not pretend we're going to feel good about ourselves by covering this nation in wires, removing parks and green space, scarring our landscape and riding roughshod over communities, just to have industries imported from overseas. That doesn't help the climate, the economy or families.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BYRNES</name>
    <name.id>299145</name.id>
    <electorate>Cunningham</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I must say the hypocrisy of this MPI today is astounding—and during Science Meets Parliament week, no less. It's yet to be seen whether those opposite actually believe in science, and I won't be holding my breath. Thanks to those opposite, we inherited an energy crisis in 2022. They had 22 energy policies and could not land a single one. I think they may have a slight issue with selective memory, but don't worry; I'll help you out. Just in case you forgot, during your decade in office, 24 of our country's coal fired power stations announced that they were going to close. Not only that, eight stations actually closed under your watch, despite your coal-wielding leader, who was in no rush to put one of your 22 policies in place.</para>
<para>On Tuesday, the release of the default market offer, the DMO, showed the retail energy bill benchmark stabilising and trending downwards after the biggest global energy crisis in 50 years. The draft DMO shows price reductions in most jurisdictions, with up to nearly 10 per cent reductions for some small businesses and more than seven per cent reductions for some households. Whilst the evidence shows that our plan is working, we know that families and businesses have still been doing it tough and we're not backing away or hiding from the problems like those opposite. Remember when they changed the law to hide a 20 per cent price hike right before the election? Well, we do. We're doing all that we can to support Aussie families and businesses, and that's why we urgently capped skyrocketing coal and gas prices, and we have been rolling out bill relief to around five million households and small businesses since July last year. Remember when those opposite voted against urgent bill relief for many millions of Australians, including pensioners, low-income families, and veterans? Well, we remember.</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government's plan is the only one supported by experts to deliver a clean, cheap, reliable and resilient energy system. It's supported by independent advice from the CSIRO and the Australian Energy Market Operator—that the lowest cost plan for a reliable energy grid is Australia's world-leading renewables, like solar and wind, firmed up with batteries, pumped hydro, flexible gas, and transmission. That's what our 82 per cent renewables by 2030 plan delivers, and we are getting on with the job.</para>
<para>Last year alone, we saw a record investment in batteries and large-scale storage, with $4.9 billion in new financial commitments—27 large-scale batteries under construction at the end of 2023, over 337,000 rooftop solar systems installed across the country and 5.9 gigawatts of renewable generation added. Whilst the opposition are out there playing scare tactics and making smokescreens with nuclear plans, we know that nuclear energy is wrong for Australia. It is far too expensive and it will take far too long to build. Our chief scientist and market operators know this. Business knows this. And the energy market themselves know this. Even AGL, the single biggest owner of coal fired power stations in Australia, have left the opposition leader out in the cold by ruling out building nuclear plants at the sites of their retiring generators.</para>
<para>But I must say that our Prime Minister put it best yesterday. He said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Nuclear power is a lot like the Liberal Party. No help to anyone today, completely wrong for Australia's future, and notorious for waste that takes forever to clean up.</para></quote>
<para>The Albanese Labor government is committed to ensuring that Australia has a reliable energy system over the coming decades, whilst those opposite are dreaming up a recipe for disaster and a reliability crisis. All month we have been waiting for those opposite to release their grand nuclear plan. But we find out this week that they are yet to work out four of the smaller issues—issues like safety, disposal, cost or location. Where are you going to put them?</para>
<para>We understand rising bills are one of the big challenges facing Australian families and small businesses, and that's why we're rolling out targeted relief that won't increase inflation. On 1 July this year, Labor will deliver a tax cut for every Australian taxpayer, because on this side of the chamber we want Australians to earn more and keep more of what they earn. Our changes mean that all 13.6 million taxpayers will receive a tax cut—2.9 million more than would have benefited under the previous government's plan from five years ago.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>249710</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The discussion has concluded.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>84</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Vocational Education and Training Regulator Amendment (Strengthening Quality and Integrity in Vocational Education and Training No. 1) Bill 2024</title>
          <page.no>84</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="r7138" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">National Vocational Education and Training Regulator Amendment (Strengthening Quality and Integrity in Vocational Education and Training No. 1) Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Consideration of Senate Message</title>
            <page.no>84</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr O'CONNOR</name>
    <name.id>00AN3</name.id>
    <electorate>Gorton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That the amendments be agreed to.</para></quote>
<para>I want to thank all members and senators who contributed to the debate on this important bill. I welcome the opposition's support for the bill and for the Albanese government's work to strengthen integrity and quality in vocational education and training, or VET.</para>
<para>The Albanese government understands that a trustworthy and high-performing VET sector is essential to not only create meaningful and secure career opportunities but also deliver the skills our economy needs. The measures in this bill, the National Vocational Education and Training Regulator Amendment (Strengthening Quality and Integrity in Vocational Education and Training No. 1) Bill 2024, will provide the regulator, the Australian Skills Quality Authority or ASQA, with better tools to protect students and tackle the minority of providers that are non-genuine or who engage in unscrupulous conduct. Non-genuine and unscrupulous providers tarnish the reputation of the sector, and the bill reinforces that there is no place for them in the VET sector.</para>
<para>The minor amendments proposed are consistent with the intended operation of the bill. In many cases they are simple restatements of requirements already in the proposed legislation. As a result, the government accepts the amendments proposed. The amendments relate to the measures empowering the minister, with the agreement of state and territory skills ministers, to determine time-limited periods where ASQA is not required to, or must not, process or accept initial applications for registration as a registered training organisation. The amendments clarified to the sector that any ministerial determination under this measure will operate for a maximum of 12 months. In her second reading speech, the member for Farrer had originally proposed a 90-day maximum for any determination under this measure. This period, as far as the government is concerned, was far too short. It would not have adequately addressed potential risks to students and the health of the VET sector. The opposition has now changed course to propose a 12-month maximum—and I thank them for that—which is consistent with the maximum period intended by the government. The amendments also detail that ASQA will publish a notice on its website as soon as practicable after a determination is registered, as was intended. They also note the existing requirements for relevant instruments and the explanatory statements to be tabled in the parliament in accordance with the Legislation Act 2003.</para>
<para>Apart from these minor amendments, the other important measures in the bill to tackle non-genuine and unscrupulous providers remain unchanged. These include automatic lapsing of an RTO's registration where it's been dormant for 12 months, the requirement for new RTOs to demonstrate quality over two years before expanding their course offerings, and increasing penalties fivefold where RTOs engage in egregious conduct in breach of the act.</para>
<para>The bill builds on the government's reform agenda in the VET sector, which includes negotiating a landmark $30 billion, five-year National Skills Agreement, the first of its kind in more than a decade, and delivering over 355,000 fee-free TAFE places in 2023. It marks the next step in our efforts to strengthen integrity and quality in VET, following our $37.8 million investment to increase ASQA's capacity to detect and address unacceptable behaviour by RTOs and our reforms to strengthen the fit and proper persons requirements to apply increased scrutiny on those in management positions within RTOs. The bill provides ASQA with better powers to remove non-genuine and unscrupulous providers who undermine integrity and trust in VET. As a result, it will better support and protect students, industry and the vast majority of RTOs—those genuine providers doing the right thing.</para>
<para>Once again, I want to thank all members and senators for their engagement on this bill.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Social Services Legislation Amendment (Child Support and Family Assistance Technical Amendments) Bill 2024</title>
          <page.no>86</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="r7163" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Social Services Legislation Amendment (Child Support and Family Assistance Technical Amendments) Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Returned from Senate</title>
            <page.no>86</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Communications Legislation Amendment (Prominence and Anti-siphoning) Bill 2023</title>
          <page.no>86</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="r7132" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Communications Legislation Amendment (Prominence and Anti-siphoning) Bill 2023</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>86</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WATSON-BROWN</name>
    <name.id>300127</name.id>
    <electorate>Ryan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Australian Greens will not oppose the passage of the Communications Legislation Amendment (Prominence and Anti-siphoning) Bill 2023 through the House. However, we will reserve our position for the Senate, given the ongoing Senate inquiry.</para>
<para>The recent news that Meta will no longer be entering into commercial deals with news organisations is a huge blow to public interest journalism in this country. A big tech company like Meta cannot be allowed to bully users, journalists and democratically elected governments by deciding which laws of the land they will choose to comply with. Meta should have to follow the rules that everyone else does. The government should move to designate Meta under the News Media Bargaining Code. The News Media Bargaining Code was legislated to ensure that platforms like Facebook are not able to profit of the sharing of news content without paying a fair price for it.</para>
<para>We need strong regulation of big tech companies that are making huge profits and have a massive influence on our democracy. It's absolutely critical that we have a diverse spread of media across Australia that's feasibly accessible to everyone. We need better protections in Australia for the local screen industries, to protect our intellectual property, to protect our workers and to keep Australian media competitive. Streaming giants like Netflix, Disney, Amazon and Stan—who, by the way, which make millions off of Australian households per year—should reinvest, at the very least, 20 per cent of their Australian earnings back into local screen industries to create local content.</para>
<para>The Netflix CEO, Greg Peters, is on $40 million. Disney CEO Bob Iger is on $30 million. The Stan CEO is on $10 million. I think these companies can afford to be paying back into our local industries. It's absolutely crucial that all Australians see stories that reflect their experiences on their screens, especially our children.</para>
<para>I couldn't be more proud that the amazing <inline font-style="italic">Bluey</inline>, now beloved across the world, was created in my electorate of Ryan. If you are a parent, or indeed a grandparent, you'll be very familiar with the scenes and environments from that show that are completely recognisable to wee locals: the beautiful Queenslander houses, the poinciana and jacaranda trees and Hammerbarn—that's our Hammerbarn from Keperra.</para>
<para>The government should encourage local content by adopting measures that empower local Australian businesses to retain significant intellectual property rights and licencing arrangements, breaking up the mega media conglomerates that hold so much power in our media landscape. There's clearly urgent reform needed in this ever-changing digital age, and the government must make sure that it listens and gives voice to all stakeholders, not just its wealthy mates. We need fewer Rupert Murdochs and more independent and local media. Thank you.</para>
<para>Debate interrupted.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>ADJOURNMENT</title>
        <page.no>87</page.no>
        <type>ADJOURNMENT</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cost of Living</title>
          <page.no>87</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr SCAMPS</name>
    <name.id>299623</name.id>
    <electorate>Mackellar</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>There's no doubt that the cost of living is one of the biggest issues facing Australians today. We've seen price hikes for fresh produce and petrol, for groceries and energy and for insurance and rents. It seems like, every time we visit the supermarket, the same basket of shopping costs more, and, no, it's not just your imagination; the packet sizes and quantities are getting smaller too. It has raised the question in many people's minds about whether the two big supermarkets, which control 65 per cent of the food market, are acting as a duopoly. Last month, Woolworths announced its half-year results. Before one-off costs attributable to its New Zealand operations, its operating profit was $929 million. In the midst of a cost-of-living crisis, it is this rise in the profit margin that worries me. Woolworths' Australian food business increased its profit margin to 6.1 per cent in the six-month period to December, up from 5.8 per cent a year earlier. The equivalent profit margins at the grocery divisions of UK chains Tesco and Sainsbury's are 3.8 per cent and three per cent respectively. I know international comparisons are complicated, but consider this: according to a recent Guardian Essential poll, 72 per cent of people are buying less in response to higher costs and 76 per cent are opting for cheaper products or brands. We're seeing increasing profit margins at the same time demand is waning. That is not a sign of a properly functioning market.</para>
<para>The other sign is the rockets and feathers syndrome: prices shoot up like a rocket but come down much more slowly. It's the same with electricity prices and insurance. We've seen price rises far above inflation. This week the Australian Energy Regulator released its draft default market offer, which proposes the maximum amount of retailers can charge for electricity. It said the majority of households can expect price cuts of 0.4 to 7.1 per cent. As more cheap renewable energy comes into the system, we should see further falls in power bills. I will be urging the regulators to keep a sharp eye on electricity providers. They must pass on these cuts in wholesale power prices to consumers.</para>
<para>What else can be done? There are several inquiries currently underway that focus on the behaviour of our supermarkets. A big part of the problem in Australia is that many of our industries are very concentrated, such as airlines and supermarkets. This results in only muted price competition. We need to consider whether our competition laws need an overhaul. The ACCC chair, Gina Cass-Gottlieb, has said the ACCC does not have the tools it needs to see and prevent all anticompetitive mergers, and it means that harmful mergers may be taking place under the radar. We need to listen to the ACCC and consider new powers not just to deal with takeovers but to ensure we stamp out behaviour designed to limit competition.</para>
<para>There is also a proactive role for governments, particularly around encouraging new entrants into the Australian market. As former ACCC chair Rod Sims said, a lack of competition has profound impacts on our economy beyond higher prices. It can slow productivity gains and hinder wage growth. In the supermarket sector, the government could help new entrants find sites and use Austrade to help them build supply networks.</para>
<para>I also highlight the need for more transparency on the activities of lobbyists. Every time the government has proposed changes to the competition laws, it faces a blizzard of opaque lobbying from business groups, supermarkets, airlines, banks and others who enjoy the riches of duopolies. Consumers don't get a look-in. The government should immediately adopt the private member's bill on lobbying put forward by my colleague the member for Kooyong.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Boyle, Dr Christopher (Chris)</title>
          <page.no>88</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SWANSON</name>
    <name.id>264170</name.id>
    <electorate>Paterson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Recently our legendary local GP, Dr Chris Boyle, celebrated a remarkable anniversary at the Raymond Terrace Family Medical Practice. Dr Boyle has been there for 40 years. He started practising the same year that Labor started Medicare—1984. Dr Boyle graduated from the University of New South Wales in 1979. Whilst Chris is not my doctor, I seek medical advice from him rather frequently. I like to talk to him about our medical system and how it can be better. I have been known to pass on that advice to the health minister. When he graduated in 1979, 50 per cent of graduates from medical schools in Australia went on to be general practitioners. Today, it's about 12 per cent. We clearly need more GPs, and we need to be encouraging our brightest young medical minds to embrace general practice again.</para>
<para>I want to thank Chris, because he has walked the talk for more than 40 years in general practice land. He has encouraged young doctors and has really gone above and beyond. After he graduated from medical school, he spent time at the Royal Newcastle Hospital—in those days, it overlooked the beach and people went there to convalesce by the beautiful seaside, as they did in those days—and, as a resident doctor, he was also a registrar at Narromine. After finishing his residency and after a time in the UK at Sheffield doing obstetrics, he came back to Australia and joined the Raymond Terrace Family Practice, as I mentioned earlier, in 1984.</para>
<para>It's an amazing career, highlighted by his generosity of spirit for our newest doctors through his role as a GP supervisor, and he currently has a role teaching the GP registrars who rotate through the practice. His passion and dedication for the development and progress of GPs locally continued through his appointment to the board of the local division of general practice, which is an appointment he has held for a number of years, and he now holds the position of chair. Dr Boyle also undertakes teaching with the college training program. He's an examiner for the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners and he also accredits GP practices.</para>
<para>Dr Boyle has taken a special interest over the years in men's health and in managing chronic diseases, such as diabetes and heart disease. The practice manager at Raymond Terrace Family Practice says:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Dr Boyle is loved and respected by patients and staff alike. He always makes time for people and puts extraordinary care into his work. His work ethic is second to none.</para></quote>
<para>He really is a legend, and he's certainly an icon in Raymond Terrace and surrounding communities. His patient base consists of generations of families, including a number of whom he delivered. In addition to his GP work, he's also been the part-owner of the practice at Raymond Terrace for many decades. The practice has been a longstanding successful business, whose staff enjoy a harmonious culture, and that's largely thanks to Dr Boyle leading the way.</para>
<para>During the COVID-19 pandemic, Dr Chris Boyle and his colleagues at Raymond Terrace Family Practice rapidly responded by stepping forward to provide the flagship gold-star service. The Raymond Terrace Respiratory Clinic, as it was called, had a team that deftly developed and implemented new forward-thinking models of care, which provided a safe space for people with respiratory illnesses to be seen. To facilitate improved care for people isolating at home, they were strong advocates for telehealth and embraced opportunities for technology, being early adopters of telehealth, e-scripts, MHR and e-referrals. The RTRC provided local peer leadership by sharing their practical experience on infection control and protection and thorough clinical assessment, and they increased access to much-needed primary care. The team saw and assessed 23,157 people from its community and provided 52,000 vaccinations. It's just incredible.</para>
<para>Congratulations, Dr Chris Boyle. You are a legend in our community. Thank you for your service to it.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Multicultural Australia</title>
          <page.no>89</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FLETCHER</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
    <electorate>Bradfield</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I am proud to represent the electorate of Bradfield, which is a very diverse electorate, reflecting the fact that it is part of a nation which is very diverse. That diversity is demonstrated and manifested in many ways, including the extensive range of community festivals, events and celebrations. In recent months in Bradfield, we've celebrated Diwali in November and Chinese new year—the year of the dragon—in February, or Lunar new year. Persian new year was celebrated just yesterday, and Ramadan, of course, is currently under observation. We have had significant local events marking each of these important festivals in Bradfield. I want to particularly acknowledge Ku-ring-gai councillor Barbara Ward for her efforts in organising Diwali events. That's something that she's been doing for some time, and it is certainly appreciated by our local Indian Australian community.</para>
<para>In the electorate of Bradfield, according to the most recent census, 24.5 per cent of residents reported being of Chinese ancestry, 3. 4 per cent Indian, three per cent Korean and 1.4 per cent Persian. Bradfield is also home to the second largest Jewish community of all the New South Wales federal electorates, and it hosts a significant Armenian community, as well as communities from so many of the nations of our wide and diverse world.</para>
<para>Australia is a remarkable multicultural nation, and it is important that we maintain our harmony, our tolerance and our mutual respect, even when there are troubling events in the world which understandably engage very strong emotions from particular communities within Australia. Of course, there's a terrible conflict going on in Ukraine, and I want to acknowledge those people of Ukrainian origin who have chosen to take refuge in Australia and particularly in Bradfield. I have met a number of Ukrainian Australians. At the moment, they're on temporary visas, but I certainly hope at least some of them become Australian citizens should that be their choice. Of course, with a large Jewish community, there are many in Bradfield who are very troubled by the appalling terrorist attack that occurred in October last year. The Armenian community in Bradfield is also very concerned about the ongoing conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan.</para>
<para>The diversity of my electorate is very much reflective of the diversity, and the increasing diversity, of Australia. Our nation today is much more ethnically diverse than it was 50 years ago. It's interesting to look at the numbers as to where people are coming from, particularly the very strong presence in our immigration numbers of people from the two nations of the world that have populations of 1.4 billion: India and China, which until recently was the world's most populous country and which India has just overtaken. So those are the two countries that are at around 1.4 billion. It's not surprising, therefore, that both of those countries are strongly represented in the numbers in Australia.</para>
<para>But there has been a change over the years. In 2012, if you looked at the populations of people in Australia born in particular countries, at that time people born in England topped the list, with just over one million. Next was those born in New Zealand—569,000. Next was those born in China—406,000. Fourth largest was those born in India—355,000. That was the picture as at 2012. In the most recent numbers, from 2020, the English born still hold a narrow lead, at 961,000, but the Indian-born population now ranks second, at 753,000. The Chinese-born population are third, at 597,000.</para>
<para>All who come to Australia from around the world make a distinctive contribution, and our nation has certainly benefited from those who have come from around the world to make a better life for themselves and their families in this country. That is certainly true within my electorate of Bradfield, which, as I've argued, is in many ways a microcosm of modern Australia. The cultural diversity is something I very much welcome. I'm proud to represent such a diverse electorate, and I'm proud to have the chance to go to a number of festivals throughout the year, marking events of significance in particular communities.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Energy, Eating Disorders</title>
          <page.no>89</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEMPLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>181810</name.id>
    <electorate>Macquarie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm very aware that energy bills are causing pain for many small businesses and households in the Blue Mountains and Hawkesbury. There is some hope in the draft default market offer that's just come out, which shows the retail energy bill benchmark is stabilising and trending downwards after the biggest global energy crisis in 50 years.</para>
<para>The default market offer is the maximum an energy retailer can charge customers on default contracts. It acts as a cap for prices for the coming year and helps people who haven't shopped around for a new electricity deal. For people in the Blue Mountains and Hawkesbury on the Endeavour Energy network, there are residential reductions in prices of up to seven per cent in the latest DMO. Small businesses on the Endeavour network will receive a 4.4 per cent reduction. That's a good thing, but there is obviously much more to do. What it tells us is that the coal and gas caps that we put in place, which the Liberals voted against, are having an effect. Together those caps and our rebate—that's the $500 rebate for households and $650 for eligible small businesses, and there's one more payment this financial year—those caps and our rebates, which the Liberals also voted against, entirely offset energy bills for some customers.</para>
<para>The reductions are also a result of reduced international pressure. We named it when it sent prices up, and we'll acknowledge it when it helps bring prices down. The decrease is also the result of a request to the energy regulator, with the Labor Minister for Climate Change and Energy, supported by state ministers, asking that the needs of consumers be prioritised, and they have been. The reduction is also evidence that we're getting more renewables into the grid, because it's simply a matter of fact that renewables are the cheapest form of new energy. Getting that new energy into the grid is our way forward. Last year alone we saw 5.9 gigawatts of renewable generation added. Compare that to the 4 gigawatts added in the entire 10 years the Liberals were in government and you might get the idea that 22 energy policies are not worth one good energy policy like the one we have. Since we came to government we've had record investment in batteries and large-scale storage, with $4.9 billion in new financial commitments, 27 large-scale batteries under construction at the end of 2023, and more than 337,000 rooftop solar systems. We're world leaders there. The Minister for the Environment and Energy has approved more than 45 renewable energy projects since coming to government and has another 128 before her for assessment. This is the energy policy we need. It will provide a secure and affordable energy future for Australia.</para>
<para>The 1.4 million Australians who suffer from an eating disorder and their families feel the devastating effects of these disorders every day. Now, thanks to a new report from the Butterfly Foundation, we have an insight into the economic and social cost that eating disorders have on the wider community. I was joined by my fellow co-chairs of the parliamentary friends of eating disorder awareness, the member for Goldstein and the member for Fisher, to launch the <inline font-style="italic">Paying the price </inline> report recently.</para>
<para>The impacts of these disorders are larger and more far-reaching than I think many people would expect. The economic and social cost of eating disorders is now $67 billion a year. That is the equivalent of $60,700 per person every year. The cost to the federal government is $4.7 billion annually. An estimated 4.5 per cent of the population are currently living with an eating disorder, with more than 10 per cent experiencing an eating disorder at some point in their lifetime. The <inline font-style="italic">Paying the price report</inline> also tells us that less than 30 per cent of people with an eating disorder will seek help.</para>
<para>In 2023 there were more than 1,200 deaths due to an eating disorder. That's more than three people every day. Any death due to an eating disorder is one death too many. The report outlines how financially debilitating these conditions can be, with individuals with an eating disorder losing an average of 10 days of work per year, contributing to lower than average wages and a greater likelihood of precarious employment. The total productivity cost to Australia is around $18 billion. These are financial impacts, and we need to do better in supporting people with eating disorders.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Forde Electorate: Quota Beenleigh, Forde Electorate: Logan Artists Association, Petterwood, Mr Lindley</title>
          <page.no>90</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VAN MANEN</name>
    <name.id>188315</name.id>
    <electorate>Forde</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We all have many wonderful community organisations across our electorates. I'd like to take the opportunity today to acknowledge the work of Quota Beenleigh. I had the pleasure of attending their changeover dinner last week, where we were able to thank the outgoing committee members as well as welcoming and congratulating the new management committee. In addition, we were able to celebrate the wonderful work and fundraising they do through their annual eisteddfod, which allows them to make a range of donations to other community groups to make our place a better place for everybody to live in.</para>
<para>Quota Beenleigh has a number of subgroups. They have a junior Quota club at Loganlea State High School. They had Quota clubs at Windaroo Valley State High School and Beenleigh State High School, but those two have now merged for the coming year.</para>
<para>The last 12 months have been quite busy for Quota, with events like the Big Box Sleepout, the Teddy Bears Picnic and nursing home visits, as well as McDonald's fundraisers to raise funds for Ronald McDonald House. The Teddy Bears Picnic allowed the members of Junior Quota to join me at my inaugural Forde Family Expo in June last year. With over 3,000 people coming through the door at the expo, they definitely had their hands full but rose to the challenge, providing families with some amazing entertainment throughout the day. This included activities such as arts and crafts, games and performances. The Forde Family Expo will be returning to the Beenleigh Showgrounds on 8 June this year, and I look forward to welcoming Junior Quota and their Teddy Bears Picnic again in a few months time. The Loganlea Junior Quota team also participated in the Anzac Day ceremony at the lifestyle centre at Mount Warren Park and took part in Mother's Day and Father's Day events at the centre.</para>
<para>'Dare, Dream and Deliver' was the theme of the night, with over 90 guests joining to celebrate the successes of 2023 and looking forward to a new year in 2024. Congratulations to the 2024 president, Judy Ludwig, and her team: vice-president Narelle Downes, secretary Cheryl Billiau, treasurer Margaret George, development and growth chair Sandra Hansen, service chair Karen Murphy and eisteddfod coordinator Heather Christensen. With the new leadership team in place for 2024, I look forward to continuing to work with Quota Beenleigh in making our community a better place for all of us to live in.</para>
<para>I also had the privilege last month of attending the Logan Artists Association collective group exhibition. It's the first exhibition for the Association in 2024, and it featured the works of Taiwanese postgraduate university students undertaking their masters or PhD, as well as Australian artists. The goal of the event was to foster relationships within the Taiwanese and Australian art communities, and, judging by the collaboration between the exhibitors and the quality of the artworks, I would say this goal was well and truly achieved. The incredible works on display showcased the dedication of the artists featured and the passion they have for their craft. For me, having been to Taiwan a number of times, it was terrific to see Taiwanese artists come to Australia and engage with our local artistic community and to continue to see those relationships grow and develop. Thank you to the team at Logan Artists Association for hosting this event, and congratulations to all the artists involved for putting together such a successful exhibition.</para>
<para>On a sad note, I would like to close by paying tribute to a wonderful gentleman in our community, Lindley Petterwood. A stalwart of the Ormeau community but also a stalwart of the LNP and the Forde FDC over many, many years, Lin passed away recently. He was a tremendous supporter of the party, going above and beyond across many campaigns, not just for me but for my predecessor Kay Elson. In my early political career, he was a tremendous mentor and helped guide me through the challenges of becoming a new member of parliament. His commitment and dedication were always an enormous help to me, and he always volunteered his time wherever he could. Lin's other passions were his successful businesses, Mr Workwear and Beren Promotional Products at Ormeau. Whether it was supplying other local businesses with the materials and clothing they needed to grow and succeed or supporting our local community organisations or sporting clubs, he was always willing to lend a hand. My sincerest condolences to his wife, Barbara, and his family. I will miss his support and friendship. May he rest in peace.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East, Tibet</title>
          <page.no>91</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DAVID SMITH</name>
    <name.id>276714</name.id>
    <electorate>Bean</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We are on the cusp of Holy Week for thousands of Christians across Canberra. Last week, thousands of people across Canberra marked the beginning of Ramadan, a month in which Muslims put themselves in the position of those who are going without, fasting from sunrise to sunset.</para>
<para>However, Ramadan this year is different for many in my community. It's a much more solemn month, overshadowed by one of the largest humanitarian crises of the 21st century.</para>
<para>The level of destruction that we are seeing in the occupied territories is devastating, and 1.7 million people in Gaza have been displaced. The death toll now sits at more than 31,000; more than 12,000 of those are children. Children are dying of malnutrition. This is unacceptable. More children have been killed in Gaza in the last five months than in all conflicts worldwide in the past four years. Gaza has now become the most dangerous place in the world if you are a child, according to UNICEF.</para>
<para>More humanitarian aid must be let in. There are tonnes of supplies sitting at crossings, being denied access by the Israeli government. There must be an immediate humanitarian ceasefire, with the release of the remaining hostages. And there must be an enduring two-state solution. This is the bare minimum needed to alleviate the suffering of the Palestinian people.</para>
<para>The Canberra region has a small, big-hearted, Tibetan refugee community, many of whom have taken the path to citizenship. Many were here earlier this week with members of the Uighur diaspora, protesting for what should be universal human rights. Many Tibetans who've come to Australia have been arrested for their activities in Tibet within Chinese borders. They've shared with me ongoing human rights concerns in Tibet and the challenges of speaking out, being afraid to communicate with family still there and the fear that any contact might generate unwanted attention on that family member. They've shared their commitment to trying to increase the freedoms that their families in Tibet experience.</para>
<para>Last week I was part of a multiparty delegation to meet with the Tibetan central administration in Dharamshala in northern India, arranged by the Tibet Information Office and the Australia Tibet Council. The parliamentary group for Tibet included Senator Dean Smith, Senator Deborah O'Neill and Michael McCormack MP. Our purpose was to meet with members of the Central Tibetan Administration, including the Sikyong, ministers of his government and members of the democratically-elected government of the diaspora, and to recognise the 65th anniversary of the 1959 uprising in Tibet. We had the extraordinary privilege of meeting with the Dalai Lama for nearly an hour. Receiving his guidance on how we approach our responsibilities and lead in a fractured world was particularly special. We also got a better insight into why the human rights concerns of Tibetans should concern us all.</para>
<para>We met with younger members of the diaspora who'd made the courageous decision to leave Tibet, their families and home in search of freedom. We heard their concerns for fellow Tibetans in China, particularly around basic freedoms to practice religion, to be active in community and to speak in language. We heard about the removal of about a million Tibetan children from families into boarding schools, and about being subject to constant surveillance. There are practices taking place that run contrary to the human right to education, the right to linguistic and cultural freedom and the right to freedom of religion or belief.</para>
<para>There was also deep concern expressed about the environmental damage being done to the roof of the world. Tibet has the largest alpine ecosystem in the world, with 14 of the highest mountain peaks providing fresh water to more than 10 river systems. Only recently, there have been reports of more than a thousand Tibetans being arrested for protesting over significant environmental concerns.</para>
<para>What was very clear, though, was that the words of support from the Australian government and the commitment to raise human rights concerns are very much appreciated by Tibetans living in exile. It's important for independent human rights observers to be allowed back into Tibet. What was also clear was that, despite the loss suffered by millions of Tibetans since 1959, they are a people committed to dialogue and to nonviolence—to a warm-heartedness and compassion for all humankind. I will continue to advocate for the rights of Tibetans whose educational, religious, cultural and linguistic freedoms have been eroded. I also look forward to continuing to work with my local Tibetan community.</para>
<para>From Gaza to Ukraine to Tibet, we should ensure that we do not become hard of heart and we continue to advocate for peace and freedom for all our brothers and sisters.</para>
<para>House adjourned at 1 6 : 59</para>
<para>The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Ms Payne ) took the chair at 09:30.</para>
</speech>
</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="">Thursday, 21 March 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;">Ms Payne</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">)</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">
            </span>took the chair at 09:30.</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>93</page.no>
        <type>CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Migration</title>
          <page.no>93</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SHARKIE</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
    <electorate>Mayo</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Every year, before the budget, I write to the Treasurer. Often, I sit down with the Treasurer and talk about the challenges in my community. This year as I compile my letter—a very lengthy letter, normally about seven pages—it struck me that I can talk about infrastructure, or the challenges of not being able to see a doctor, perhaps for weeks on end, or that desperate hope that many in my community have that, potentially, they will be bulk billed. That's like an elusive mirage! I could talk about all of those issues, particularly housing and the huge challenge that we have with even finding a house; people are renting out sheds or a room in somebody's house for an exorbitant fee. But it struck me that we can't address all of this unless we address migration and look at the massive migration we've had in this nation in the last couple of years.</para>
<para>I would draw to everyone's attention a report in the <inline font-style="italic">Australian</inline> newspaper today by Terry McCann, in the commentary section. He said that migration was more than half a million people net last year and that it's threatening to go even higher this year. This is affecting our access to doctors and to housing. It isn't simply a staggering number, it's that almost the population of Adelaide, the fifth-biggest city in this nation, has arrived over the last two years with respect to migration. Adelaide: with every house, every hospital, every road, power networks—everything. Think about the fact of building that in two years; we haven't done that in this nation and that's why we are under such enormous pressure from migration. Data released today showed a net increase of 55,330 migrants in January, the highest intake ever recorded and more than double the 21,000 from last year.</para>
<para>What we're seeing here is massive migration, despite the minister coming into the parliament and saying that he was aware of this. Last year the minister said that they would address migration. So I will write to the Treasurer and talk to the Treasurer about these challenges with housing, but unless we address migration in this nation we aren't going to improve the way of life for Australians. Dick Smith saw this over a decade ago with his book <inline font-style="italic">Dick Smith's </inline><inline font-style="italic">Population Crisis</inline>. We are making life harder for Australians by creating this absolute hot pot with relation to migration. It's unnecessary, I think it's a dereliction of our duties in this place and we need to have a very serious and sober conversation about the Australia that we are creating.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Castellorizian Association of NSW, Davis, Mr Ian</title>
          <page.no>93</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr THISTLETHWAITE</name>
    <name.id>182468</name.id>
    <electorate>Kingsford Smith</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last month, I joined members of the local Greek community to celebrate 100 years of the Castellorizian Association of NSW.</para>
<para>The island of Kastellorizo in Greece shares a special place in the hearts of many in our community. You would notice that the traffic on the streets of Kingsford and Kensington isn't as cluttered and congested in July and August as it normally would be. That's because half of the population has gone back to the island of Kastellorizo, their homeland. Many migrated from the island after both World War I and World War II and settled in our community, and we're glad that they did. They established the association to help settle newly arrived migrants and to raise funds to support relatives back home.</para>
<para>The Castellorizian Club on Anzac Parade in Kingsford was a feature of that, and their notorious dinner dances, which brought members of the community together, are well known. Several prime ministers of Australia have visited the Castellorizian Club.</para>
<para>Castellorizo and the City of Randwick, where the association is situated, have a sister city relationship and are an example of the strong bonds that exist between our communities. Cazzies, as they're known in the local community, have enriched our community and made it a better place to live. I want to pay tribute to all of those who have volunteered through the association over the last century, and I particularly thank George Pizanis and Victoria Kazaglis Gallagher, along with members of the association, for maintaining such a wonderful community oriented organisation. Congratulations to the Cazzie Association for 100 years.</para>
<para>In terms of significant milestones, I want to congratulate Ian Davis for 70 years as a member of the Coogee Beach Tennis club and a remarkable 50 years spent coaching the next generation of tennis players. I joined members of the club last month to celebrate Ian's huge contribution to tennis in our community. He's an extraordinary individual whose dedication, passion and talent have left an enduring mark on Coogee and beyond. He's not just a coach. He continues to play and he's currently ranked No. 1 in the world for his age—a remarkable contribution to tennis not only in our community but across Australia and the world. I think of the countless individuals that he's mentored. A tennis coach isn't just a tennis coach. They're often a parental figure and a mentor for many young people in our community. It was a fitting tribute to someone who has dedicated his life to the sport.</para>
<para>The club is celebrating his past achievements while also looking forward to the future. The Ian Davis cup will be an annual event that will bring together coaches and club members in a friendly competition, and the court at the beach has been named in Ian's honour. Congratulations to Ian on 70 years of the Coogee Beach Tennis club. May your love for tennis continue to shine brightly for many years to come.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Stewart, Ms Clare</title>
          <page.no>94</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LLEW O'BRIEN</name>
    <name.id>265991</name.id>
    <electorate>Wide Bay</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>At the recent Queensland local government elections, Noosa mayor Clare Stewart stepped down from her role after an exemplary term in office. Noosa is a prospering, vibrant, resilient and dynamic place, and no community can become what Noosa has become without strong, passionate dedication and leadership. Clare is the embodiment of these qualities. Her huge contribution to the Noosa community reflects this, from the coast to the hinterland and in all the Noosa villages in between.</para>
<para>Clare and I have successfully worked together to advance Noosa, securing more than $25 million in Australian government funding to make Noosa's roads and bridges safer, strengthen Noosa's communities, support local groups to prevent bushfires, assist in disaster recovery, sustain Noosa's environment and grow the economy. The expansion of the Peregian Beach Digital Hub, the new Peregian Beach Community House and the Olive Donaldson sports pavilion are just some of the projects we've worked on together to achieve. Clare was also instrumental in securing the Cooroy Hinterland Playground, the Noosa Parade upgrade and the Beckmans Road upgrade. She also leaves a powerful legacy on social issues, having raised record funding for the prevention and awareness of domestic violence.</para>
<para>While Clare has been a fantastic mayor, no community is immune from the consequences of an incompetent and failed state Labor government. We need change in Queensland, and that begins with the election of a Crisafulli LNP government. The LNP listens to and understands Noosa. It was the LNP which understood the uniqueness of Noosa and restored its individual voice after Labor silenced it through forced council amalgamations. Now, after so many years of Labor, their cost-of-living crisis and rising energy prices are hurting householders and businesses. Crime rates have soared, and the youth justice system needs an overhaul. And we need to improve access to health and housing.</para>
<para>Clare is serious about tackling these issues, and, if you want real action in Queensland—and in Noosa—it's blatantly clear we need to change the state government, and that starts by electing representatives like Clare Stewart, who has put herself forward as the candidate in Noosa for the state election, who will be a key player in an LNP team and sit at the table where the decisions are made. It's crucial that an LNP government is elected in Queensland, and we need Clare Stewart there alongside David Crisafulli and the LNP team to ensure Noosa gets its fair share.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>East Malvern RSL, Universities</title>
          <page.no>94</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr ANANDA-RAJAH</name>
    <name.id>290544</name.id>
    <electorate>Higgins</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My first visit to East Malvern RSL was on Anzac Day for a dawn service attended by hundreds of people, young and old. I saw for myself the vital role they play in our community in providing a safe, open space for veterans to build new bonds, maintain old ones and have a few laughs along the way. I was struck by the warmth and hospitality of their volunteers. Service is a lived value in this place—a straight line from conflict or humanitarian zones to the community. President Geoff Tobin told me how the RSL had taken the brave step of scrapping their slot machines in the hope of creating a warmer atmosphere for families, not knowing whether they would survive without the machines.</para>
<para>Their courage has been rewarded. I've been back to East Malvern RSL five times since—for a veterans forum with Minister Keogh, an NDIS forum with Minister Shorten, a climate forum with Minister Bowen, a scams forum with Minister Jones and a thankyou to our selfless volunteers during the Voice referendum. Attendance has been high at every event thanks to the warm community atmosphere of the venue and its leaders. Constituent after constituent has told me how, in all the years they have lived in Malvern East, they have never known the RSL to be so close in proximity, let alone being so welcoming. I thank the team at East Malvern RSL for all they do for our community, and I encourage all my constituents to pay them a visit.</para>
<para>The Australian Universities Accord is a road map to set higher education up for the next two decades. Australia is facing critical skills shortages in the energy, digital and care economies. If onerous HELP debt or unpaid placements leading to placement poverty holds students back, we will not meet our skills needs. I think of Connor, a 23-year-old who contacted me in December last year about his $55,000 HELP debt. He was fortunate to have obtained employment but was concerned about looming indexation, which would see a seven per cent hike in his HELP debt. This is a common refrain. One parent said, 'My son has become despondent; he feels like he cannot get on with life.'</para>
<para>The Universities Accord recognises that students need to be financially supported. It recommends that the Morrison government's Job-ready Graduates Package be ditched, that we pay students for placements and that the Higher Education Loan Program be modernised to reduce the burden of repayment, especially on lower income earners. It also recommends limiting disincentives to do more work, changing the timing of indexation and ensuring that people's HELP loans do not grow faster than their wages. I will be advocating for all these reforms within our government.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Western Australia: Renewable Energy</title>
          <page.no>95</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs MARINO</name>
    <name.id>HWP</name.id>
    <electorate>Forrest</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Labor government is proposing—and, from what I'm seeing, is absolutely determined—to build a massive 7,500-square-kilometre offshore wind farm in Geographe Bay, in the waters off the south-west of WA. To put this in perspective, my entire electorate covers 8,000 square kilometres, from Yarloop in the north to Augusta in the south. That will be the size of this. The wind zone stretches from west of Mandurah through to Geographe Bay, beyond Cape Naturaliste, and further out into the Indian Ocean. In an area that we all know and love as one of the most beautiful parts of the world, the government is planning to produce 20 gigawatts of wind turbine energy from towers estimated to be up to 330 metres tall, from base to blade tip. This is wholly and solely driven by the Labor government's carbon emissions policies—which are forcing companies to reduce their emissions by five per cent, year on year to 2030, under the safeguard mechanism—and its 'renewable energy only' policies.</para>
<para>This week the Labor government sent the department to brief communities affected by this decision. What we got was a sham drop-in session, a process that has further angered and frustrated the community. Given the community already believes that the Labor government is determined to do this, irrespective of what the community says, the sham community consultation process has simply added to that belief. I went to a briefing in Binningup–mostly local fishermen—and I was back in the electorate on Saturday to get to the Bunbury sessions on Tuesday.</para>
<para>There was no presentation. Local people came along to hear exactly what the government is planning to do, to listen to the questions and concerns of others, to better understand what the impacts will be and to have their own questions answered. Instead, the crowds of local people had to queue endlessly, compete with each other and repeatedly line up as they moved from one information area to another to ask questions. Many left angry and frustrated when they saw that it was a sham process. Perhaps, in retrospect, this was the deliberate intent of the process the government was using. That's what they believe. For those who stayed, I spent time listening to the questions they were asking and what they were concerned about. I had conversations with many of them.</para>
<para>Yesterday, I was getting phone calls from people in Busselton who were still in the queue, waiting to get in. They were beyond angry and frustrated. It is no wonder the community doesn't have any confidence in what the Labor government is doing. And they're being told to accept this proposal now when it's going to take at least 10 years before we know the actual details of the towers and exclusion zones. They're asking people to accept this right now, in this circumstance. This is a sham process.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>May, Mr Jason, Naven, Ms Libby</title>
          <page.no>95</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr REID</name>
    <name.id>300126</name.id>
    <electorate>Robertson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to acknowledge Jason May, a proud Wiradjuri man on the New South Wales Central Coast. Jason is the joint owner of Bawamarra Cultural Services in Lisarow, which has taken out the Indigenous business category award at the 2023 Innovate with nbn Grant Program awards. This is an outstanding achievement of this excellent service being provided by these cultural services. As part of this award, this business has been provided with $15,000.</para>
<para>Bawamarra Cultural Services provides individualised cultural holistic mentoring to children facing challenges, particularly children and youth in out-of-home care or those who have been involved with the justice system. I recently met with Jason and learned more about these cultural services and their work. Jason told me that the mentoring they provide to children and youth holds immense significance and can have a transformative impact on lives. On top of Jason's work with Bawamarra Cultural Services, he has been instrumental in establishing the Central Coast's Men's Wellbeing Circle and supporting mental health charities across Australia. I want to take this opportunity to congratulate Jason and Bawamarra Cultural Services on this recognition and its outstanding services to the Central Coast.</para>
<para>I also want to commend Libby Naven of Erina Heights, who has been awarded a 10-year long service medal for her involvement with the Duke of Edinburgh's International Award. Ms Naven was recognised with this award at a special ceremony at Government House in Sydney, attended by His Royal Highness Prince Edward. The Duke of Edinburgh's International Award is the global leader in the organisation and accreditation of non-formal education through its framework.</para>
<para>For over 60 years, this framework has been used by education providers and community organisations to accredit the non-formal learning outcomes and achievements of young people. The award, in Australia, started in 1959, and over 800,000 young Australians have participated since this award began. Ms Naven is involved with the Wamberal Surf Life Saving Club, where she connects the Duke of Ed award with young members of the club. The Wamberal Surf Life Saving Club is an outstanding surf club within my electorate of Robertson, and I know firsthand the commitment each member has to their local community.</para>
<para>I want to congratulate Libby Naven on this recognition and thank her for her decade of service to the Central Coast community, to the state of New South Wales and to Australia, and particularly for the nurturing and development of young people at the Wamberal Beach Surf Life Saving Club. Like I said, it's an outstanding surf club. We have many surf clubs up and down the New South Wales Central Club. Wamberal Surf Club sits in between two federal electorates—mine, in the south of the Central Coast, in Robertson, and Emma McBryde's, the member for Dobell, in the north. It's a surf club that takes in many people from our region. Again, I want to congratulate Libby Naven on this recognition.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Education</title>
          <page.no>96</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PEARCE</name>
    <name.id>282306</name.id>
    <electorate>Braddon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Australia is one of the world's most successful multicultural nations. It's in our DNA to celebrate everything that binds us together. That's what makes us Australian. But, equally as important, the other side of that coin is the maturity in which we embrace and accept our national diversity. Our tapestry of cultures, faiths and beliefs all form the complex fabric that makes our society work. If we are to accept that this enriches our community, our diversity, and our commonality, then we must also accept that it is vital that both are fiercely and equally protected.</para>
<para>We are fortunate in Australia that our education options currently mirror our diverse society, and it is crucial that to protect these. Being involved in faith based education is a choice that is increasing year on year in Australia. Parents choose to send their children to faith based schools. Teachers choose to teach within these faith based schools. Support staff choose to seek employment within these faith based schools. There is no compulsion. In doing so, they agree to adhere to the ethos of those schools. If you don't wish to work, or have your children learn, within the ethos of a faith based school, then there are an array of other fantastic options available to you.</para>
<para>But the very existence of religious schools and their ability to provide faith based education is being threatened. Today it is expected that the Australian Law Reform Commission will recommend the removal of section 38 from the Sexual Discrimination Act. These sweeping reforms, if legislated by the Albanese government, will remove exemptions that currently allow religious schools to preference the employment of teachers and other staff who share their beliefs. In essence, schools will be required to employ staff who are antagonistic to their religious teachings and missions.</para>
<para>It is vital that the Albanese government reject this attack on the freedom of our faith based schools. We must continue to support the rights of parents to choose the school that they see as best. It is a fundamental part of Australia's multicultural and multifaith tradition. Parents choose faith based schools because they want their children educated in a community where staff adhere to and support their family's faith traditions. It's crucial that this doesn't change. I call on this government to vehemently reject these proposals.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Whitlam Electorate: Renewable Energy</title>
          <page.no>96</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JONES</name>
    <name.id>A9B</name.id>
    <electorate>Whitlam</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Our government is committed to making Australia a global renewable energy superpower. Since coming to government, and after a decade of delayed action from those opposite on climate change and on transforming our energy generation system, we've implemented the necessary strategies to reduce our emissions. Doing nothing is not an option. Over the past 12 months we've introduced a gas and coal price cap to drive down prices, and this has delivered significant decreases in energy prices. We've also delivered significant funding for energy upgrades for households and businesses. Cheaper, cleaner and more reliable energy is not only good for the environment; it's also key to our nation's economic prosperity.</para>
<para>But, as we seize the opportunities of our net zero transformation, it's important that rural and regional Australia is part of that journey. Regions such as the one I represent, in the Illawarra and Southern Highlands, have an important role to play in our nation's energy transformation; in fact, they need to be part of it. It matters to households because, without it, energy bills will go up and up and up. But it's also critical to industry because there is no future for manufacturing without a viable, robust, productive and profitable renewable energy industry. No renewable energy means no manufacturing, and that matters so much to the electorate that I represent.</para>
<para>It's why our government is listening to communities as we invest in cheaper and more reliable energy sources. It's a big job. It includes our investment in community batteries locally, in suburbs like Dapto and Warrawong and in other places—more to come. It includes lower emissions steel making in the critical BlueScope Port Kembla steelworks and our recent community consultations on the future of offshore wind proposals in our region. Why are we doing all this? Because we've got no choice. We have to do it. We need to reduce our emissions to protect our future and generate jobs through clean energy. It's absolutely a no-brainer. It matters everywhere, but it matters particularly to coastal communities.</para>
<para>The good news is there are huge economic and environmental benefits waiting at the Illawarra's doorstep if we embrace renewable technology. An offshore wind industry in the Illawarra can support over 2½ jobs during construction and another 1,250 ongoing jobs once that's complete. And just one rotation of an offshore wind turbine provides as much energy as an average rooftop solar installation generates in a whole day. Yes, we have to listen to communities and, yes, we have to protect the visual benefits of our region and ensure that amenity is protected, but we can do these things and we will. I'm engaging closely with the energy minister to protect these values.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bowman Electorate: Stronger Communities Program</title>
          <page.no>97</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PIKE</name>
    <name.id>300120</name.id>
    <electorate>Bowman</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Redlands is strengthened by countless local community and sporting organisations run by passionate volunteers who dedicate thousands of hours to their clubs, churches and community hubs. The benefit the people of my community receive from these organisations is immeasurable. It's why the previous coalition government committed to support these groups through the Stronger Communities Program. These grants were provided for small capital projects that delivered social benefits for local communities. This funding has enabled many local projects and initiatives that simply would not have otherwise been possible.</para>
<para>Under the coalition government, the Stronger Communities Program delivered a total of $1.2 million in invaluable funding to community and sporting organisations within the Redlands over the last eight years. In the last year I have been proud to support many investments in the Redlands, with $17,000 for VMR Victoria Point to upgrade their navigation device, $8,360 for the Redlands Community Centre's new photocopier and printer and $10,000 for the Cage Youth Foundation's new ride-on mower. The Straddie Sharks rugby league club received $20,000 towards shade coverings around their oval, $20,000 went to the Point Lookout Surf Life Saving Club to contribute towards their new patrol vehicle and $14,000 went to the Redlands Church of Christ for shade sails for the children's play equipment and improvements to the community meeting rooms. The Redlands Special Olympics received $3,900 to purchase new basketball equipment and uniforms, $4,600 want to St Vincent de Paul Cleveland to purchase and install a new CCTV system, $16,000 went to the mighty Redlands Tigers Cricket Club for improvements to their clubhouse and $8,000 went to help fund a bathroom renovation at the Macleay Island Progress Association. Amity Point Community Club received $14,730 to replace the balustrade on the club's first-floor deck, $4,510 went to the Multicap Capalaba Community Hub to upgrade their projector and outdoor space, $5,000 went to the Redlands Pickleball Club for purchase of club equipment and a defibrillator and $3,900 went to the Redland Bay Cyclones rugby club to purchase vital first-aid equipment.</para>
<para>Despite the success of this program for the Redlands and for Australia, the Labor government is cutting this program entirely. In doing so, they are saying that the needs of organisations in my electorate do not matter. They're saying that investment in community organisations across Australia does not matter. For these organisations to flourish, they need certainty to plan projects that benefit our local communities. Stronger Communities provided a guarantee of funding that was specifically earmarked for our communities. The government's decision removes this guarantee and creates uncertainty for these community groups. I call on the Labor government to reverse the decision.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Adelaide Jaguars Women's Soccer Club</title>
          <page.no>97</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUTLER</name>
    <name.id>HWK</name.id>
    <electorate>Hindmarsh</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Adelaide Jaguars are the largest female-only soccer club in South Australia, with over 350 members, 75 volunteers and a broader community of over 1,000 supporters, which is pretty impressive considering they had only 70 members five years ago. The club was started by Craig Schoof in 2009 due to the lack of opportunities he saw for his daughters to play soccer at existing clubs. With his vision to ensure women and girls are the club's absolute priority, the club also endeavours to promote a social community for women and girls as well as the health benefits that women and girls gain from being involved in sports. The club has named their Annual Spirit of the Jags Award after Craig, who sadly passed away last year. Craig will also be honoured with the unveiling of a plaque at Jubilee Reserve in May this year.</para>
<para>The Adelaide Jaguars have provided an opportunity for women and girls to play soccer in Adelaide in a female-friendly and -focused environment. Members have come from all over Adelaide and as far away as Port Lincoln and even Mildura to join the team. The Jaguars' reputation is so strong that international students have chosen to study a tertiary education in Adelaide just so they can join and play for the Jags. Some of the club's older members have joined to experience the fun of team sports and had never played or even considered playing soccer prior to discovering the Adelaide Jaguars.</para>
<para>Unsurprisingly, the club has received a huge amount of interest from community members since the Women's World Cup. Many of the players have gone on to join the Junior Matildas camp, demonstrating the club 's ability to produce high-performing players.</para>
<para>Club chairperson Bronny Brooks won the 2023 Westfield Local Hero Award for her work in expanding the club and improving the standing of women's and girls' soccer in our community. Club coach Cameron Staker received a volunteer recognition award in 2023 for his efforts coaching three under-11 teams and two adult community teams. Jules Maio also received a volunteer recognition award for his work cooking for more than eight teams regularly after Wednesday training as well as coordinating club volunteers. In 2022, the club won the City of Charles Sturt Club of the Year Award.</para>
<para>Currently all junior players who join the club enjoy access to all Adelaide United women's games, to see their heroes play at the top level. The Jaguars are currently seeking a permanent home base in Adelaide's western suburbs, and over 40 members, parents and coaches recently came out to my street-corner meetings in West Beach to show their passion for a permanent home. The Jaguars have had to recently turn away over 100 players due to their lack of a physical home. This terrific club deserves its own home, and I look forward to doing all that I can help it find one.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>282237</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>CONDOLENCES</title>
        <page.no>98</page.no>
        <type>CONDOLENCES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>White, Senator Linda</title>
          <page.no>98</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr O'CONNOR</name>
    <name.id>00AN3</name.id>
    <electorate>Gorton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I speak today with much sadness to reflect on, remember and pay tribute to the remarkable life of Senator Linda White, a true champion of workers and a tireless advocate for the rights of women within the Labor Party and beyond. She was also a dear friend. Linda was a recent parliamentary colleague of mine, but before that we spent years together at the Australian Services Union. I was the national assistant secretary, representing, in particular, local government workers across the country, and she had the responsibility of looking after clerks in public and private areas of our country. Together, we worked on a whole range of issues for almost a decade. We had our moments, but we mostly agreed and worked together on a whole range of issues.</para>
<para>We were also sometimes dealing with some in the Australian Services Union that had a different view. Of course, when you bring together so many constituent parts of the union movement, if you bring together a series of unions—the Municipal Employees Union, the Municipal Officers Association, the Federated Clerks Union—like any amalgamation, you have tensions, you have to rationalise the organisation and you have to ultimately reconcile some of the competing cultures that come together through an amalgamation. That's whether it's a council, whether it's a footy team, whether it's a union or whether it's a company. These things, of course, can be fraught, but ultimately, if successful, those matters are reconciled.</para>
<para>Linda and I always found ourselves on the same side, trying to ensure that the Australian Services Union was a strong union representing the interests of members first, a progressive union, and ensuring that we focused on those things that matter most to working people and their families. Some of our opponents within the union dubbed us 'the evil twins', which we appropriated and took as a term of endearment. From time to time, when we met, we would actually refer to each other as 'evil twin'!</para>
<para>But Linda was a remarkably indefatigable champion of working people. It was a terrible shock when I was informed of her passing just a few weeks ago. I didn't really have a chance to say goodbye to her, which I would have wanted. She was a very private person. Her illness took her very quickly, and, frankly, many of her friends and her colleagues were both terribly dismayed but also shocked at the speed with which she passed. That's been a very difficult thing to reconcile—not having a chance to properly talk to her before she passed.</para>
<para>During her time as assistant national secretary, she led numerous campaigns that directly benefited working people across the country. When Ansett collapsed in 2001, it was Linda White who was at the forefront of the long fight for the rights of the airline's 16,000 workers. I just so happened at that point to be a newly elected member of parliament. I'd left the union. I was also involved in that terrible corporate collapse because my seat covered many areas where thousands of Ansett workers lived—Sunbury, Woodend and Gisborne, around Tullamarine airport. She and I worked together. I was engaged in the parliament, talking to the workers and talking to the administrators that took over the company when it went into liquidation. We worked together again, even though by that stage I'd left the union.</para>
<para>Two decades later she was elected to the Senate, and she reminded us that the terrible thing that happened to Ansett was a brutal reminder that markets don't always prioritise the wellbeing of workers. She said in her first speech that she was inspired by the resilience, bravery, leadership and collective action of Ansett members. Ansett members eventually recovered almost all of the $760 million that was owed to them.</para>
<para>Linda's leadership was instrumental in that fight, but she was also instrumental in the fight for equal pay for over 200,000 social and community service workers. After nearly six years of continuous campaigning by union officials and members, pay rises of between 27 per cent and 43 per cent were achieved, following a change in equal pay laws and a favourable Fair Work Commission result in 2012. That equal pay case changed the lives of women workers in the community sector.</para>
<para>Linda was long concerned with the unequal retirement incomes of men and women. In her first speech to the Senate, Linda spoke of the gap between the retirement savings of women and men and how it was greater than the gender pay gap. She went on to say:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Australians' retirement savings have too long been an ideological plaything of the government, unconcerned about real outcomes for women and more about who is on the board of the industry superfund. Instead of focusing on making super work for women and others who need it in retirement, opponents of superannuation constantly tried to undermine our system. Superannuation … should be above petty partisan politics.</para></quote>
<para>Linda White would have been delighted that a significant step forward for equity in women's retirement will happen next year, when super is to be paid on government paid parental leave. She served many years on the Australian Labor Party National Executive; in fact she was the longest-serving woman ever on the executive of the oldest political party in Australia. As a fierce champion of women, she played no small part in the creation of Labor's affirmative action policy, which has led us to where we are now: the first Commonwealth government in history with a majority of women parliamentarians.</para>
<para>Linda was a born organiser. In any group she would bring everyone together with a common purpose and goal, whether that was in the workplace or her book club. She was passionate about everything in life, and her passing leaves a profound void in all our hearts. I will miss her indomitable spirit, her sharp wit and her unwavering dedication to the causes she believed in.</para>
<para>I extend my deepest condolences to her family—her brother in particular; her staff; her colleagues; and her many, many friends. May her legacy serve as a guiding light for future generations. Linda told the Senate in her inaugural speech that there was no doubt in her mind that governments change lives and that strong, progressive Labor governments change them for the better. Linda White's time in this place was of course far too short, but, over a lifetime of fighting for others, she changed countless lives for the better. May she rest in peace knowing that her contributions have made a lasting impact.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
    <electorate>Riverina</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>One year, seven months and 17 days—it's not a long time, is it? It's not long at all. It's far too short. Most members of parliament and senators, on average, spend a lot longer arguing their cases, putting forward their ideologies, voting, speaking and being present in this chamber and this wonderful building—the home of democracy for Australia. One year, seven months and 17 days was the time that Senator Linda White, senator for Victoria and senator for the Australian Labor Party, spent in this place, and yet, despite the brevity, she contributed a lot.</para>
<para>When the Deputy Prime Minister, the member for Corio, stands to deliver a condolence motion, I always listen very carefully, because there's probably nobody in this place that does it better than he does. No notes, off the cuff and from the heart—but he's always articulate and always passionate. He said, in his condolence motion:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I came away from last Thursday, to be honest, wishing I had known Linda better. In that, I take away a lesson.</para></quote>
<para>Sometimes we spend so much time arguing the case and just getting on with our busy lives that we don't ever stop and smell the roses. We don't ever stop and talk to even our own colleagues about their personal lives and what's important to them, and we're all too caught up in the moment.</para>
<para>I didn't know Linda White at all, to be honest. I did put up a social media post acknowledging her passing because I think it's important, as parliamentarians, that we acknowledge the contribution made by people. Yes, I had seen Senator White in the hallway. Yes, I had a couple of greetings with her, but we'd never had a conversation, and, like the Deputy Prime Minister said, that's probably a bit remiss. As a member of parliament in the House of Representatives, sometimes you'll see senators and often wonder who they even are. We're so far apart in this place, unlike in the previous building, where they were all so intimate and close. But, when you read Senator White's curriculum vitae and when you see what she had done and what she had achieved, you are filled with admiration.</para>
<para>It is so sad to think that in recent times we lost Kimberley Kitching. I remember that, when I rang my daughter, Georgina, and told her of Kimberley's passing, Georgina cried. She knew her well. They'd spent time at the races and they'd got on way too well. When Peta Murphy passed away, I cried. To think that the Victorian division of the ALP has now lost three wonderful, brave, courageous and outstanding women in just recent times—Kimberley passed away 10 March 2022, Peta Murphy passed away 4 December last year and now there's Linda White. That is so, so sad not just for the ALP division in Victoria but for our nation. Then you see that Kimberley was 52, Peta was 50 and Linda was just 64 years young—again, taken way too soon. Life can be so cruel. Life can be so unfair.</para>
<para>There's probably not much, if I had got to know Linda White, that I would've agreed with her on, truth be known. But, when you see some of the things that she did represent, I do also admire and honour her. We do need more women in parliament. We do need more vibrant, strident, confident and even perhaps not so confident women. We just need more females representing the interests of all Australians. That is true.</para>
<para>Speakers on this condolence motion have, like the minister just before me, talked about how there were times when they didn't agree, and it has come through these speeches that Linda didn't mind telling you what she thought, from all accounts. She was a unionist, and I do believe in unions. I was a member of a union for 21 years—everything in balance! But I also take heed of the words of the foreign affairs minister, Senator Penny Wong, who I have great respect for:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I always valued Linda's wise counsel. She was a loyal friend and colleague. And I was always in awe of her fearlessness and forensic analytical skills, which she applied in pursuit of strong convictions all the while charming people with her quick, sharp wit.</para></quote>
<para>That's coming from somebody who, yes, is fearless and has forensic analytical skills. Anybody who's ever been in Senate estimates knows that's Penny Wong to a T! She has strong convictions, yes, while charming people with her quick, sharp wit. It sounds like Senator Wong and Senator White were peas in a pod!</para>
<para>We've lost somebody who had much more to give. We've lost somebody way too soon. I mourn her loss even though I didn't know her. I, like Richard Marles, wish I had known her better—wish I had known her almost at all. I regret that. It probably serves as a lesson to us House of Reps members who don't know senators to go across, introduce ourselves and make ourselves known. We need fighters in this place. We need people like Linda White. I'm glad her legacy will serve us well in the future, because no doubt the arguments she proffered, the cases she put and the representation she gave will serve not just the Australian Labor Party but also this parliament into the future. May she rest in peace.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr GARLAND</name>
    <name.id>295588</name.id>
    <electorate>Chisholm</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's always difficult to say goodbye to a friend and colleague. Linda and I came into this place at the same time. Linda had been in the party a longer time than me, but, when we came in together, it was wonderful to discover all the things we had in common, like our love for the arts. We were often at early-morning special events together for tours of the National Library here in Canberra, which Linda loved and played an active role in. We went to events at the National Archives to see exhibitions. We often spoke about all of the ways we could elevate the arts in this place. I spoke to Linda's office about establishing a parliamentary friends of opera group, which I know she was very eager to do. Unfortunately, of course, that won't happen under Linda's stewardship, but perhaps that's something to pursue in her honour. I know there were some beautiful pieces from her favourite operas played at her memorial. Those pieces will now take a special meaning for me, remembering they were played when we sat with friends to remember her.</para>
<para>One of the very last events I attended with Linda was a tour of the Victorian Trades Hall in Melbourne, which was a quick skip from Linda's office on Lygon Street and somewhere we both loved. There was the history. We were amongst friends. I was assistant secretary there for a number of years. In this job, it's often difficult to see the people from the lives that we may have lived before we became members of parliament or senators. It was a lovely occasion when we were brought together again with our friends, who I was reunited with again at Linda's memorial. We had the opportunity to take Minister Plibersek through this remarkable building—the oldest continuous trades and labour council in the world. I know that it was a great source of pride for Linda to be able to showcase the incredible history particularly of the Victorian union movement. She played such an important role in that movement, particularly around ensuring feminised workforces were able to get equal pay and enforce their rights.</para>
<para>Linda was formidable. You would always want Linda on your side in a fight. There was a particular moment last year when I remember just being absolutely blown away by her courage. We were sitting at Aussie's having a coffee, and an article had appeared in the newspaper that day that had incorrectly suggested that Senator Linda White was on the right of the Labor Party. She was very unhappy with this mischaracterisation! She saw the journalist at the table beside us at Aussies, and she just got up, marched over and introduced herself. 'Hello—' and I will leave the journalist's name off the record for now. 'Senator Linda White. Member of the left. Have been for decades.' There was a correction published later that day.</para>
<para>I thought Linda was amazing. The legacy that she has left for women in the labour movement, the Labor Party and the union movement is incredible. Before we both entered this place together, Linda was a senior figure that I admired so much in the movement. I encountered her at industrial law symposia and events, and at Labor Party and union movement events. She was such a key figure in the Victorian and national labour movement. It's really difficult to imagine our movement without her, but we're going to have to live that reality.</para>
<para>We have so many friends in common. I look to the people that she worked with at her beloved Australian Services Union. I know that they are grieving and will miss her so much. I know that that union is so close to one another, and they fight so hard, collectively, for their members to get a fair go. I know how much they're going to miss her. I want to state here, on the record, that, if there's anything I can ever do to support those dear friends, I stand ready to do so.</para>
<para>Listening to all the stories at Linda's memorial painted a picture of someone who lived a very full life—too short a life, yes, but a life that was absolutely lived courageously and with so many wonderful and surprising experiences. I wish I could have seen Linda again and asked her about her years as someone involved in the <inline font-style="italic">D-G</inline><inline font-style="italic">eneration</inline>, one of the most significant comedy outfits of the late 20th century. I would ask Linda about her catering business that she ran. How remarkable Linda was and what a full life she lived. I'm going to really miss her. I think we all will miss her here. I think we all know that her career in the Senate was too short. We can imagine what she would have done if she had had more time in service to our nation.</para>
<para>I send my thoughts and my love to her brother, Michael, and his wife, Julie; to her wonderful staff, who loved her so much and worked so hard; and to her friends and comrades in the union movement. Vale, Linda. We'll miss you so much.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr HAINES</name>
    <name.id>282335</name.id>
    <electorate>Indi</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise in this chamber today in deep appreciation of the life of Senator Linda White, who passed away on 29 February while in office. I offer my deepest sympathies to Linda's brother, Michael, and his wife, Julie, and to Linda's many friends, her colleagues in the Australian Labor Party, the Australian Services Union and the trade union movement more broadly. I particularly wish to offer my sincerest condolences to Linda's devoted staff: Ben Armstrong, Ekta Mahal, Amit Aalok, Ned Lindenmayer and Ead Stokes. Linda was so proud of her team and they were proud of her in return. The respect and affection between them was so apparent in the dealings my office had with them and in our work together. I know they are grieving deeply, and I offer them my most heartfelt support not just now but into the future.</para>
<para>Today I join with many people across Linda's extensive working life and public service to record a tribute to celebrate her extraordinary contribution to our nation and to mourn her terrible loss. Many who knew Linda far better than I have eulogised her 40 years of work and advocacy and illuminated the principles of fairness and equity that underpinned the way she approached her work and her life outside of work.</para>
<para>Linda was a lawyer who commenced her professional life at Maurice Blackburn and then moved to the Australian Services Union, where she fought to improve the wages and conditions of workers right across Australia. Linda's work led to significant social and legislative reform which extends to literally thousands of people. We all want to make a difference, but Linda White actually, truly, materially did.</para>
<para>Linda led the fight for Ansett workers in the wake of the airline's collapse, and ensured that workers won back almost all of the $160 million owed to them. I remember that time but I have no memory that Linda was there until I found out that she led it. She fought for and won equal pay for 200,000 community and social services workers, delivering pay rises of up to 43 per cent for some of the lowest-paid workers, many of them women. She championed equal retirement outcomes, family and domestic violence leave, paid parental leave and just so much more. Linda's activism is the stuff of legend. Her advocacy for women and her leadership in seeing this parliament achieve equal representation of women is storied. She played a big role in securing strong affirmative action targets for the ALP and, as the Prime Minister said this week in his condolence motion, that this current Labor government has a majority of women is in no small part due to the work of Linda White. I honestly have no idea how the ALP works, but I reckon for her to be on the National Executive Committee for the ALP for as long as she was is evidence enough that this woman could probably stare down a charging rhino!</para>
<para>Since her untimely death I have listened to story upon story describing Linda 's intelligence, her tenacity and her courage, and I have heard how Linda White's skills as a formidable warrior were equally matched by her capacity for kindness and her wonderful sense of humour. Linda loved flowers, music, visual and performing arts, and literature. She loved sport. She not only gained joy from a cultural life but, true to her nature, she contributed to making sure that the arts flourished by giving of her strong skills in governance as a board member, director and patron. Linda was a joiner but, more than that, she was an active, generous participant. She was motivated by her love of the arts and motivated by her desire to make sure that they were accessible to all citizens. She was about the democratisation of the high arts.</para>
<para>She, famously, applied her skills in getting the job done from the backstage, no matter where she was. In fact, as the member for Chisholm just said, one of the things I learned about Linda recently was her love of theatre and her early talent in movie-making and, indeed, in production skills in such epic, early Australian comedy genius as <inline font-style="italic">The D-Generation</inline>. Who knew? Perhaps if Linda had chosen another life she may have been writing the material for <inline font-style="italic">Utopia</inline> rather than providing part of the subject material! This woman was just incredible!</para>
<para>I met Linda for the first time in September 2022 when, as a new senator, she was appointed as chair of the Joint Select Committee on National Anti-Corruption Commission Legislation and I was appointed deputy chair. We subsequently served together on the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the National Anti-Corruption Commission until February this year when she, reluctantly, had to step aside to manage her illness. Regrettably, I had but the shortest of experiences in working with Linda. But when she was appointed chair of that first NACC committee, I asked the Attorney-General, 'Who is Linda White?' The A-G simply smiled and said: 'Helen, you will enjoy working with Linda White. You will like Linda White.' He was wrong about that; I actually loved Linda White. Naturally, though, I went away and checked out Linda White's CV. It was so impressive! That I had not seen nor heard of her said so much more about me than her—because it did—as I was to learn. It said so much about the humility of Linda—humility is just an attribute that I cannot begin to say how much I appreciate.</para>
<para>When Linda was appointed chair of the NACC committee, this is what she said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I am honoured to Chair the Committee and look forward to the Committee playing its role in cementing the NACC as a truly independent and effective national integrity body.</para></quote>
<para>In the stewardship of the NACC legislation and then in the joint statutory National Anti-Corruption Commission committee, as I worked beside her I saw that she was curious, committed and observant—a fair and a careful custodian of this historic new integrity body. As other members of that committee would attest, what we saw in this particular government chair was someone who truly was fair minded, someone who was a good listener—loyal, of course, to her government but unflinching in her duties and not afraid to speak truth to power when the moment came that she needed to do that, because she indeed ensured that the National Anti-Corruption Commission got off to the right start. She truly ensured that it would be effective and independent. She said that she would do that, and, in true form, Linda meant what she said.</para>
<para>Linda served on 12 committees in this parliament in the one year, seven months and 17 days of her time in this parliament. But, as we have come to learn and appreciate, she served our nation for so much longer than that. I am deeply, deeply sorry that I will not get to serve with Linda for longer. I'm deeply sorry that my committee work with her has come to its conclusion, but, gee whiz, I learnt so much from her.</para>
<para>Linda was the gift that the broader Australia never knew we had, but she is the gift whose work endures beyond her.</para>
<para>I had the great honour of attending Linda's memorial service in Melbourne. Much-loved Australian actor Rachel Griffiths AM, friend of Linda and Linda's fellow board member on the Australian Centre for the Moving Image, was the MC. I've got to say not many people will have a farewell attended by a prime minister, a deputy prime minister, senior members of state and federal governments, dignitaries and luminaries of all sorts from across the arts, law, civil society, sport, alongside their many, many friends. And I know I wasn't the only person in the room who discovered surprise after delightful surprise at the gift of Linda White—the nods of recognition, the chuckles at a revelation of one of her dry one-liners right up to the moment of her final stay in hospital. Perhaps it was the ultimate way for someone like Linda, who was a gold medallist at keeping her cards close to her chest—that it was not until she was gone that we saw the talents and contributions to public life of Linda White that truly was a royal flush. I reckon that would be just the way she'd want it. Unusually that day, for a politician, I found myself not wanting the speeches to stop, because every speech revealed another layer that answered the question I asked of the Attorney-General: who is Linda White?</para>
<para>It was fitting that this incredible, incredible woman's memorial service was hosted by a Hollywood actor, because the curtain has gone down on a magnificent life, with the audience screaming for more, longing for more. Vale, Senator Linda White. You were a great Australian, and I am so much better for having known you.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEMPLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>181810</name.id>
    <electorate>Macquarie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you to the member for Indi for those beautiful words, which capture a different part of Linda White than many of us saw. It was only when you worked with her closely that you really got insights, and I'm very privileged to say I was able to have my own insights through my role as Special Envoy for the Arts.</para>
<para>It is very fitting that, given her passion for the arts, the song <inline font-style="italic">Bread and Roses</inline> was played at Senator Linda White's memorial service last week because it perfectly captures what motivated Linda and what she contributed to public life. The song has been much talked about, but not everyone knows its origins. It came from a speech by American suffragette Helen M Todd. In 1910 Todd said that women's right to vote 'will go toward helping forward the time when life's bread, which is home, shelter and security, and the roses of life, music, education, nature and books, shall be the heritage of every child that is born in the country, in the government of which she has a voice'. That's where the phrase derives. And Linda did so much to win both bread and roses for working people in Australia, and she did a great deal to empower and enfranchise women.</para>
<para>Her efforts to institute affirmative action rules within the Labor Party have improved the representation of women in our democracy, and we see that every day in this parliament. It's because of those measures that the current parliament has more female voices within it than any other parliament has in Australian history and that the current government has a majority of women. Linda provided a powerful example of female leadership. She was a trusted mentor to countless young women across the union movement and within the Labor Party, and their careers have flourished, thanks to her. That legacy will long outlast all of us.</para>
<para>Linda was motivated by a deep and intuitive sense of justice. As a lawyer, she confronted police corruption and institutional child sexual abuse. She devoted the major part of her career to the service of working people, indeed, to some of the lowest-paid workers in the country. At the Australian Services Union she used her powerful intellect and formidable talent for negotiation to secure better rights and conditions for workers. She served as its assistant national secretary for 25 years. It was in this role that I first saw Linda in action, at a national Labor Party conference nearly 15 years ago. Knowing little about Victorian Left politics, for me it was a big learning curve, and she was impressive to hear and watch then and at subsequent consequences. I had a glimpse of her efforts to fight for equal pay for 200,000 community and social services workers, mostly women, which resulted in pay rises of up to 43 per cent.</para>
<para>It's worth remembering the many issues she fought on, such as the entitlements of Ansett workers after the airline's devastating collapse in 2001, which saw former Ansett workers win back almost all of the $160 million that was owed to them. There was her fight on the Howard government's WorkChoices legislation and the injustice that it sought to entrench in Australia's industrial relations. There was her fight for the financial independence of women, her fight for paid parental leave and family and domestic violence leave, and her fight for superannuation to be paid on government paid parental leave. And we all know how pleased she would have been to hear our recent announcement on this.</para>
<para>For all Linda did to improve the pay and welfare of working people, she also believed that everyone deserved to feed their souls, whether it was the joy of gardens or it was the spiritual nourishment provided by the arts. Through her words and her deeds, she argued that the democratisation of access to culture and creativity must be an objective of the Labor mission. I would like to pay particular tribute to Linda's involvement in these areas. In her first speech, she acknowledged the central role of the arts in Australian society. She reflected:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The arts let us delve into other worlds and see ourselves and our society reflected back, for better or worse. They allow us to imagine new possibilities and better ways of doing things. People like to talk about the economic value of the arts, but their true value goes far beyond dollars and cents. Artists and creative professionals are talented, clever and possess the power to impact lives through their skill. I stand in awe of the things they do.</para></quote>
<para>Something that I will always remember about Linda is the joy she personally took from arts and culture. She was always one of the first to say yes to a visit to the National Gallery of Australia to see the latest exhibition. Her love of literature and the fellowship she found in her longstanding book club were important fixtures in her life. There was no-one more appropriate to be on the board of the National Library of Australia, where she contributed her considerable energy, intellect and advocacy. She ensured that MPs and senators had an opportunity to do an early morning visit to the National Library to understand the expanse of that collection and the reason why saving Trove was so important. It was a privilege to get to know Linda a little bit more through these things when she joined us here in Canberra, and the arts were our common bond.</para>
<para>We served in this place together for too short a time, but something I will remember fondly will be those common causes on which we advocated together. Together we sought to raise awareness of the valuable work that the national collecting institutions do each day and the need to support them sustainably into the future. She helped achieve that. Just a week before her death, Linda joined me in advocating for proper funding for our national arts training institutions—the institutions who ensure Australia is training up its actors, filmmakers, Indigenous dancers, costume makers, musicians, circus performers and creatives for the future. Sadly, this would prove to be our last piece of shared advocacy. Had she been with us longer, I have no doubt there would have been many more. If there was ever an opportunity to advocate for the arts in this place, Linda would take it. If there was an early morning visit to an exhibition or a performance to attend, Linda would be there.</para>
<para>I will miss her company, advice and allyship on the causes we both cared so much about. I extend my deepest sympathies to Linda's brother, Michael, her extended family, her friends, her colleagues and the many who cared for her. I also would like to acknowledge her staff, who've lost not only a colleague but a friend as well. Linda was able to make the very most of her remaining time in this place because of their commitment and hard work. They did Linda proud in arranging such a dignified farewell for her. In particular, I'd like to acknowledge Ben Armstrong, who was a steadfast support to Linda throughout her time here as a senator and a constant during the final stages of her illness.</para>
<para>Linda White was with us for too short a time but during that time, damn, she made a difference—a real tangible and positive difference to the lives of countless Australians. She was a formidable warrior of the trade union movement. She was a committed and effective champion of the arts. She was a tireless servant of the Australian people. She was a fine senator, a respected and trusted parliamentary colleague and loved by many. May she rest in peace.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WOLAHAN</name>
    <name.id>235654</name.id>
    <electorate>Menzies</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'll just acknowledge the two condolence speeches given before me. They were heartfelt and quite moving. You did Linda proud in the way that you delivered those. The member for Indi and I both served with Linda on the Joint Select Committee on National Anti-Corruption Commission Legislation and then the Joint Standing Committee on the Anti-Corruption Commission. I got to work closely with both of them, and I would like to turn to that briefly in a moment.</para>
<para>In Linda's first speech she spoke about jigsaw puzzles and how her mother's table was covered with unfinished jigsaw puzzles. As we discuss the last piece of Linda's jigsaw puzzle, we get to reflect on all the other parts. In a way, the jigsaw metaphor is something that applies to all of our lives. As a new member of parliament, people often ask me, 'What is it like, what did you expect and what did you not expect?' One of the things I didn't expect was, and is, the powerful influence of people from across the aisle and the crossbench. You can be influenced in ways you didn't expect. It is not lost on me that this is the second condolence motion speech I'm giving on Labor women who have influenced me in significant ways. Peta Murphy was the chair of the social and legal affairs committee, and the work that she did on gambling reform was something that was significant and meaningful and it will be long-lasting, I hope. Here we are again, talking about another Labor woman who influenced my life, Linda White, in her leadership and stewardship of the National Anti-Corruption Commission, an institution that I hope will long outlive all of us and serve our nation and democracy well.</para>
<para>When we look at our first speeches, in some respects they are a form of art because we don't just sit down at a computer and write them from start to finish. We reflect on the component parts. Linda said this about the arts:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The arts let us delve into other worlds and see ourselves and our society reflected back, for better or worse. They allow us to imagine new possibilities and better ways of doing things.</para></quote>
<para>Linda's speech and her service in her short time in this place did that in the 47th parliament.</para>
<para>I didn't realise before reflecting on Linda's speech how much we had in common. We both worked at McDonald's throughout university. Linda referred to her time at McDonald's as quite a significant sliding-door moment.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">A division having been called in the House of Representatives—</inline></para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 10:44 to 10 : 5 4</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WOLAHAN</name>
    <name.id>235654</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I had just reflected on the fact that Linda and I shared the common background of having worked at McDonald's. That was a significant sliding-doors moment for her, because it opened up her eyes to the union movement. She became a union delegate through a sense of injustice that older workers were not being given enough casual shifts. I know exactly what Linda was talking about. I remember working at McDonald's as a 19-year-old, and, as your rate went up, you got fewer shifts. I didn't go and join a union movement at that, but I can see how that sense of injustice prompted her to start the meetings and to get organised, and it led her to a significant career in the union movement.</para>
<para>The other thing we had in common was that we were both lawyers. Linda went on from Melbourne university to be an articled clerk at Maurice Blackburn. In her first speech, I was quite moved by what she had to say about listening. Linda said this:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Maurice Blackburn also brought me into contact with people during the hardest times of their lives. I am forever grateful to the many dedicated lawyers who shared their knowledge and impressed on me the need to listen and understand what is going on for clients, both legally and personally. Learning how to give people straight advice about their prospects has held me in good stead ever since.</para></quote>
<para>I think that skill that Linda talked about there was something that served her well in this place, and all of us. To not just listen but to actively listen—that is a skill that Linda crafted well, and it was good advice for all of us.</para>
<para>The final point that I'd like to emphasise is Linda's commitment to our democracy. Again in her first speech, she said this:</para>
<quote><para class="block">One promise I can make is that no-one here will die wondering what I think. People will always know where I stand, and already know that I'm not afraid of saying what's on my mind. … I will fearlessly and, some may say, relentlessly pursue action that will make our national community and the state of Victoria a better place for all of us.</para></quote>
<para>That statement says so much about Linda. Through her speech, she was extremely proud of her union roots and the labour movement, but, when it came to what drove her in this place, she singled out the national community and the state of Victoria, as a senator. I saw that in action on the Joint Select Committee on National Anti-Corruption Commission Legislation, when I got to sit in Linda's office and we would discuss potential amendments that could be made so that this could be bipartisan. Linda recognised that bipartisan support for the National Anti-Corruption Commission was important for it lasting long after all of us. Then, once the commission was established, Linda also recognised that the institution is at its most fragile in the early years. I won't breach confidences of a private hearing, but I will say this. I saw one moment—and it was in some of Linda's last moments as chair—where I got to see someone have that conflict between what they assess is in the national interest and what might not be in their party's interest. That's a key moment for anyone in this place, and it's difficult. I saw Linda choose the national interest, despite her extreme pride in her party and the union movement. That says so much about her character and what these words meant to her:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I will fearlessly and … relentlessly pursue action that will make our national community and the state of Victoria a better place …</para></quote>
<para>And she did that. She added this after that:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Australian democracy is more fragile than we realise. … I think everyone in this parliament has an important role in restoring the public's trust in the political process. We must remain able to consider turning points in our thinking. We might not agree with each other or those who are advocating to us, but not listening is always a mistake.</para></quote>
<para>That's where Linda combined her skills in active listening with her devotion to the national interest. She saw this important new institution come to be, one which I think will enhance our democracy. It's a great legacy for Linda to have done that. It wasn't an easy thing to do.</para>
<para>To Linda's family: Michael, her brother; her sister-in-law, Julie; her father, John; and mother, Freida, I'm so sorry for your loss but I know that you are proud of Linda's lifetime accomplishments, particularly in this place. To Linda's staff—Ben Armstrong, Ekta, Amit, Ead and Ned: I got to meet some of you in the NACC joint select committee. You are wonderfully loyal and professional staff; it says a lot about Linda that you were on her team, and I know you are grieving too.</para>
<para>I began by noting the jigsaw piece of Linda's life that was this place, and there was so much more to Linda that I didn't know until I read the eulogies from her funeral. She said this in the final words of her first speech:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I thought of my mother and her love of jigsaw puzzles that covered our dining room table at home, sometimes for weeks on end.</para></quote>
<para>She went on to say:</para>
<quote><para class="block">This may or may not prove to be the hardest puzzle I attempt in my career, but the level of complexity and the picture of a fairer and more just nation that I hope to reveal is a challenge that I'm very much looking forward to tackling head-on, …</para></quote>
<para>Linda concluded:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I thank the Senate.</para></quote>
<para>Can I conclude by saying, I thank you, Linda White; our democracy and this parliament are better for you having served us. Rest in peace.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms THWAITES</name>
    <name.id>282212</name.id>
    <electorate>Jagajaga</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I didn't get to work with Linda White in this place for very long and I do feel a real sense of loss because of that, because Linda was so formidable and so strategic. It was very clear from when she first arrived here that she was in the place that she was meant to be and that she was in the place where she knew she was going to make an outsized contribution. And she had just begun to make that contribution when, unfortunately, she was taken from us. I do know that there was so much more she had to achieve on top of what were her already very significant achievements. A lot has been said about those over the past week in this place as well, so I won't run through all of them, but I do want to highlight some of those that I think were the most significant, and also that I think resonated particularly for me from Linda's life.</para>
<para>Linda really dedicated her entire life to working on behalf of Australians—Australian workers and particularly Australian women workers. While I didn't get to work with Linda for very long in this place, I know that it's partly thanks to her support that I am here—the work that she and so many others did to reform our Labor Party so that it was a place where women got elected. They put in place a system which means we had quotas for getting women elected to this place, bringing us to the situation now where we have a government and a caucus that is majority female. That is a massive achievement. I can't even begin to comprehend, really, some of the discussions and the obstacles that would have been put in the way of Linda and the people she was working with when she was trying to negotiate some of those rules. We have all heard echoes of those arguments. Again, I can only picture in my mind the strength—and probably, I think, the very short shrift—that Linda would have given to those arguments, knowing that she was arguing for our party to be a better party, for this parliament to be a better parliament and for the lives of women across this country to be better because their voices were being heard in this place. That in itself is a huge achievement.</para>
<para>Of course, it was not just in the Labor Party and in the parliament that Linda advanced women. It was in so many areas, and I want to highlight one particular area where I think Linda's work was just outstanding: the SACS Award, raising the pay of people in highly feminised industries that for most of our history have been largely ignored and largely underpaid. It's just work that was there and not valued in the way it should have been. That award decision was landmark. It obviously had an immediate impact on all the people, particularly women, working in social and community service areas.</para>
<para>But I think its impact wasn't just that very important, immediate impact of raising the pay rates there. I think it was also a really important moment in that broader drive, and we still continue now to reset how we do see women who work in and contribute to the social and community sector and the care sector to actually genuinely recognise that contribution as an economic contribution and one that our society and community is largely built on. We did see some of that conversation come to the forefront during the pandemic, but it is absolutely built on that sort of work that Linda spent her lifetime in the union movement working on. It also, I think, really came to the forefront with that landmark case.</para>
<para>I've really appreciated, while we have been marking the great contribution that Linda made to our country and our community, hearing more about her earlier life. I appreciated hearing that she, like me, began her working life at McDonald's and that it drove her to unionism. Yep—I can absolutely see the McDonald's structures that drive you to unionism! Again, what a mark of Linda that she, from that very early stage, saw how workers coming together could further their interests and could make sure that workplaces were fairer places for all. From there, she went into the law, where she had a significant impact again through her intelligence and the very thorough work that she did there. And then she went into her long and important career in the union movement. As the Prime Minister has described it, she then went on to become 'the most qualified backbencher to join this place'.</para>
<para>My condolences go to Linda's family, to her brother and to all the friends and comrades who miss her so much. It really was wonderful to be able to attend her funeral and to hear the loving, witty speeches paying tribute to this smart, fun woman who did love her work and the achievements she made but who also knew how to have fun. My condolences to her staff, who saw her through to the very end. Again, it was clear and has been clear just how important a role they played in Linda's life.</para>
<para>I was absolutely part of the group who also saw Linda as an Insta influencer! She was a prolific poster, I think more so before she joined the Senate. But I always appreciated seeing which Melbourne restaurants Linda had been visiting, and I knew that they were ones that I needed to put onto my list to make sure I got there, because they were always worthwhile. This was the other side of Linda. She absolutely loved the best things that our city Melbourne has to offer. The arts, culture, food and football were all things that she greatly valued and enjoyed, and she also worked so that others could enjoy them as well. It was really evident that her belief was that these were good things that everyone should be able to enjoy, not just a select few. Our city, again, is better for the work that Linda did to grow and drive these cultural institutions that we enjoy.</para>
<para>Linda was a very private person. I think for me, as for many in this place, it did come as a shock that she was so sick and that she was taken from us when she was. I hope that, amongst that desire she had for privacy, she did die knowing how much she was appreciated and valued and how much she was respected for her many, many achievements in this place and in a lifetime working for Australians and Australian women. Those achievements cannot be overstated. Vale, Linda White.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BANDT</name>
    <name.id>M3C</name.id>
    <electorate>Melbourne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On behalf of the Greens, I want to extend my condolences to Linda White's brother, to her extended family and to the broader Labor family and Labor movement, who I know are still grieving the far-too-soon loss of Linda White, and especially for those in Victoria who have lost two very strong, important and progressive women in a very short period and far too early.</para>
<para>People have heard from many others across this chamber about what Linda stood for and the work that she did while she was in this place. The speeches and the commitments you've heard from across the chamber are a testament to the principled approach Linda brought to her time here and her tenacity. I had been fortunate enough to see that going many years back, as someone who worked as a lawyer for unions in Victoria and as someone who had worked with Linda as far back as 2001.</para>
<para>People remember the attacks on the World Trade Center in September 2001 and how significantly that changed things for people right around the world, including in Australia, but something else happened at that time that very directly involved Linda, and that was the collapse of Ansett. At that time, I had the privilege of working as a lawyer for the ASU, and Linda was the assistant national secretary. While much of the world's attention was focused justifiably on the attacks on the World Trade Center, many of us had to grapple with the fact that one of Australia's biggest employers was on the verge of collapsing and leaving a large number of workers in the lurch.</para>
<para>A number of leaders of the union at the time, including Linda White; Ingrid Stitt, who's currently a Victorian minister; and Martin Foley, a former Victorian minister, were thrown into a position—with those of us who were lucky enough to be in a position to be able to help them and the workers—of having to deal with a big employer going into collapse, leaving huge numbers of workers in the lurch, many of whom stood to lose incredible amounts of money and entitlements, entitlements that anyone who works in Australia would have thought they were entitled to if their employer collapsed. All of a sudden, that was at risk for many workers, as well as their ongoing livelihoods. For the representatives, including Linda White, there was an immediate crash course that everyone had to go through to learn what happens to the workers when their company goes under, how they could try to keep their company afloat and what happens if that doesn't work. We had a situation in Australia where many of those workers stood to be left out in the cold.</para>
<para>Something that still impresses me to this day is the tenacity and the intelligence that Linda White and the other ASU leaders showed to ensure that everything was done to, firstly, try to keep the airline in the skies and their members in employment. This included working out how to change an administrator, which was something that many workers hadn't done before, and putting in place someone who might give the workers a better deal. When that turned out not to be the case, they had to ensure that everyone would get their entitlements. I still remember the union leadership working out how to get every single worker to come and sign a form to proxy their creditor rights to them. It was an astounding situation that shouldn't have happened. There were lines around the ASU office in Carlton as workers were queueing up, and the union leadership worked over the weekend and around the clock to ensure that the workers were in the strongest possible position to exercise their rights and get everything that they were entitled to. Of course, that was at that time, but then, over the years, it became apparent again that the workers stood a chance of being left in the lurch and potentially ending up losing savings. Especially for people nearing the end of their working life—they were relying on continuing to have a job with Ansett. For many people, it was very difficult to go and find another job, especially if you were nearing retirement age, and, all of a sudden, the entitlements that you were relying on just weren't there.</para>
<para>I was really privileged to see Linda White and those other representatives in the ASU, together with a number of other unions, just not give up year after year to ensure that workers of Ansett, who bore no responsibility for the collapse, got what they were entitled to. In part as a result of that, we've since changed the laws in this country and we've put workers in a slightly stronger position. But I just want to inform the House about having seen the hard work that Linda and the others did before she came into politics, and she never gave up. We've heard in speeches from other Labor members about how proud she was to be wearing those Ansett wings that, I think, a former flight attendant had given her. That was a justifiable honour that was bestowed on Linda because that work was not done for personal gain but done for the benefit of others, and it was done relentlessly.</para>
<para>Just as people here from all sides of politics have paid tribute to Linda's persistence and relentlessness when she was in this place, I can tell the parliament that that is a feature that was present before she came to this place, and there are thousands of people in this country, if not tens of thousands, who are directly better off as a result of what she did. People need to know that that work, that selfless hard work, day in, day out—and not only month after month but year after year—made a big difference to people.</para>
<para>I think the Deputy Prime Minister said words to the effect about being on the opposite side of the table from Linda White on a number of occasions, and, of course, this is not the instance to relitigate any political differences. But I do think, to be fair to her, Linda would've been the first to say that she would probably rather I hadn't been elected. The ASU, which I was a member of when I was employed in that sphere, is in my electorate, in Carlton, and they proudly campaigned for the former Labor member to retain her seat and for subsequent Labor candidates to come in and hold their seats.</para>
<para>That's the way it is, but, despite that, I want to pay tribute in that respect as well to the movement that Linda had been a part of in reforming the ASU and getting it to the point where they were in a position to deliver for workers in the way that I've just described. My predecessor Lindsay Tanner and some of the others that I've mentioned were part of a group called the clerks reform group, which has been referred to in previous speeches. I do want to pay tribute to the work that they did because that work reformed a union that had increasingly become out of touch with its workers into one that was able to take up the fight and represent them, including the many Ansett workers that were members. In full openness, honesty and transparency, yes, I'm sure—because we're all here in different parties—that Linda would have preferred that somebody else was sitting in this spot as the member for Melbourne. But, not withstanding that, I think it's really vital at moments like this, when we reflect on someone's life, that we can look across the chamber and acknowledge Linda's incredible work not only as a fighter for her own side and her own party but, as I said before, the very real and tangible difference she made to tens of thousands of people's lives in this country, who are better off as a result of what she did. Vale, Linda White, and, on behalf of the Greens, again I extend my condolences.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CLAYDON</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
    <electorate>Newcastle</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's with a heavy heart, but it's a great privilege to be able to stand in this chamber to offer some reflections on the phenomenal life of the late senator Linda White. Certainly, news of her passing was devastating for everyone who knew her, and I think we can see through all of the speeches made both in the Senate and in the House today that she had a large life that impacted tens of thousands of people. I know that her passing was devastating news to everyone who had the extraordinary privilege to have known, worked with, loved and embraced Linda White. That was especially so for those of us in the Labor family, of course. You could not ask for a better comrade by your side, and Linda was incredibly smart, she was witty, she was passionate, she was determined and she was really a fearless warrior for justice—and I will come back to that a little later.</para>
<para>She was dedicated, absolutely, to improving the lives of Australian workers. We knew that from her entire working life. She articulated that in her first speech. It's what she practised in her daily life. She was pivotal to so many critical battles and reforms in this country, and many of them have been so beautifully articulated by the speakers on this condolence motion.</para>
<para>We've heard much about her time as a very young woman working for McDonald's, and, while she did not win that fight at the time, it really did prove to her the power of collectivism and what that can achieve. And that sense of love and respect for collective action is something that really drove her throughout her life, and it's something that those of us that have been in the Labor movement for a long time also share and appreciate. A common thread for those of us that sit in the Labor benches, of course, is that acute understanding of just how powerful collectivism can be—when you are able to move yourself above and beyond the individual and think about the collective good and the power of collective action.</para>
<para>In 2012, while she was the national secretary of the Australian Services Union, Linda led the phenomenal campaign for equal pay for more than 200,000 non-government social and community service workers across Australia. A number of my colleagues have pointed to this moment and to this really extraordinary campaign that was so successful, often known and referred to as the SACS award. You cannot overstate the significance of that moment for a group of people—mostly women, let's face it—who were mostly ignored in Australia in industrial relations disputes and in conversations in this parliament. These were women who were low paid, on the fringes, doing incredibly valuable work but mostly unseen and mostly unheard.</para>
<para>Linda, who was always good at being able to think big, really drove that most critical of campaigns, a very successful campaign, for equal pay. I remember Linda prosecuting this argument at Labor conferences year after year, building the case. Her work with the Australian Services Union really enabled us to break through those terrible barriers that had been in place for those women, who, as I said, were mostly ignored, were without power and seldom had their voices heard. That was, of course, the antithesis of what Linda White ever wanted to see. So it should be of no surprise to those of us who knew Linda that she would want to take on this big battle, and she did. It was a relentless campaign over six years, and it changed the equal pay laws in our nation.</para>
<para>A long and detailed Fair Work Commission case was put to ultimately win those pay rises of between 27 and 43 per cent, plus safety net increases that got delivered over eight years. That's what I mean about Linda White being able to think big. She was not really content about just tinkering around the edges. She didn't suffer fools, but she was patient and she knew the work that had to be done in order to win that case. If it was going to take six years or eight years, she was up to that task. We should all be very, very indebted to her for that. You really cannot understate the transformational nature of that case, which changed the lives of women workers in the community sector forever. Some extremely underpaid people saw increases of some $700 a week in their pay, which even the most optimistic of us at the time would have thought was almost an unimaginable outcome. It was indeed a tremendous victory.</para>
<para>Linda taught us that, if you are successful woman, you absolutely have a duty, a profound obligation indeed, to bring other women along with you. It's a great lesson to learn. It's one that I take very much to heart. She took that responsibility very seriously and fulfilled that ambition with great distinction. I note the member for Jagajaga—I was in the chamber when she was speaking earlier—acknowledged how there are many of us Labor women who would want to thank Linda for her longstanding service and her doggedness to ensure that our party changed affirmative action rules.</para>
<para>She, like so many of us, was so proud to serve in Australia's first majority female government. It's a little-known fact actually in this nation, but we can say thanks to Linda. She would be the first to acknowledge all the women that came before her in that fight too. I'm going to come back to just how important her role was on the national executive of the ALP and the role she took in driving Australia's affirmative action commitments over a long period of time. With her own election into the Senate in 2022, she became part of, as I said, Australia's very first majority women government to be elected. It was very fitting that the woman who drove that change for us as a party over many decades was now part of that female majority government.</para>
<para>I will come back to some of her great work as a senator, but I do want to touch on two aspects of Linda's work that I got to see while working in close partnership with her. I had some really wonderful insights into Linda's capacity to make profound change. One of those was actually on the floor of a national conference for the Australian Labor Party back in 2015. I hadn't had a lot to do with Linda White at that point. I'd seen her, as I said, on the floor at conferences. We were both regular attendees from our respective state and territory branches at the national conference. She was in Victoria and I was in New South Wales, so we belonged to different branches of the party, and it was at the national conference that we would really get to connect.</para>
<para>I had a profound interest in making sure that Labor was going to accelerate its commitment to affirmative action as quickly as it could. This is something that Linda and I often spoke about. I recall that this conference was the one where we finally got the ruling changed to ensure 50-50 female representation in all of our power structures within the party, as well as for the preselection for winnable seats. This was a big moment for the Australian Labor Party. For those who had been around this debate for a few decades, leading up to this moment, there was a little bit of frustration about not moving more quickly. Without giving away too many secrets here, I will never forget one moment when I absolutely saluted Linda White.</para>
<para>We had been bogged down in some very difficult negotiations—as you can imagine, across all the states and territories and all the different component parts of the Australian Labor Party—and it was very uncertain as to whether we could land the 50-50 target at this conference or not. It seems extraordinary now, in 2024, to be saying that, but it was a very, very live issue. It was pretty tense. We were in negotiations, then morning tea, then back again, then lunch. It was going on and on, and I remember walking out, feeling a little bit dispirited and wondering whether we would pull this off this time or not. I walked out with Linda and she looked at me. I won't repeat everything that was said at that moment, but it was basically: 'Enough. We're going in there. It's 50-50 or nothing, and we're going in hard.' I was like, 'Woah, okay!' It was like music to my ears. Not only was she intelligent and brilliant at negotiating, but she had the ability to empower those around her to have the strength to go in alongside her and have many of those difficult conversations that had to be had about the importance of gender equality in our world.</para>
<para>I have held that moment with me in many, many subsequent negotiations and efforts to ensure that our party adheres to its affirmative action principles. As I say, it's not just about having women in winnable seats so that they get elected into parliament; it's also about ensuring that the very power structures within our party are alive to the significance of gender equality and the role that women play. Like the member for Jagajaga and indeed many of us, we are deeply indebted, as those who come behind and get to benefit from the work of Linda White and all of those extraordinary women who came before us to ensure that we could get a resolution up at the 2015 national conference that established targets for positions within the party and within union delegations. This was another important skill. Linda was able to bring some authenticity to the table in encouraging union delegations to ensure that they had targets for women. She empowered the party's national executive, then, to intervene when state or territory branches didn't adhere to the rules, where they didn't preselect or hit their 50 per cent target on preselection.</para>
<para>For Linda, making those rule changes was really important. It ensured that they weren't just hollow words at a conference when we got up to speak at the lectern, or, indeed, standing in parliament—that you did the hard yards. It ensured that we had real rules and regulations, with sanctions if they were not met. That was the work of Linda White, who moved that motion in the 2015 national conference, and it was Linda White that gave all of us the strength and courage to stand up and say, 'Enough. Enough is enough.' So, Linda, your legacy in that regard will live for many, many decades to come, and we are really, deeply indebted to you.</para>
<para>The second piece of work that I got to do with Linda White was here, in this place. Again, I'm going to refer to party business. I was asked by the Prime Minister to head up a working group to revisit the Labor Party's policies around sexual harassment, bullying and harassment. I was very fortunate to have some remarkable people on this working group, but you won't be surprised to hear that the national executive representative was Senator Linda White. I couldn't have been more pleased to be able to get to work with Linda on the next stage of our work together to ensure that not only did we have gender equity within our party but also that our party would be a safe and respectful place for women to participate at every level.</para>
<para>It was a very big body of work. It took a couple of years. For those that may not have a deep appreciation of the way that political parties operate, the Australian Labor Party is a federated party, a bit like this parliament. Federation means you've got to do a lot of negotiation across a lot of state and territory branches. I've got to say there were a lot of people who doubted this was even possible. Linda, of course, was one of those women you need by your side at that moment because she utterly believed in this project. She believed that no legitimate political party in 2022—it was at that time—could proceed without having codes of conduct and rules in place that were fit for purpose, ensuring that our party was leading efforts to ensure best practice.</para>
<para>There were four documents created. I cannot tell you how proud she was. Again, when everyone suggested that it was going to be an impossible task, it was Linda's drive and determination—and her reminding me constantly that this is our window of opportunity; this is our moment to get this done—that really helped sustain me and many others on the committee to ensure that we didn't waste our time, we didn't waste our duty, and that this body of work was completed. Linda felt that as strongly as I did.</para>
<para>Whilst I got to chair and often speak and do a lot of the front-leaning work, I could not have done it without Linda White. With her knowledge of national executive operations and of the way that all of the state and territory branches operate, she was critical in always sustaining me and others on the committee in having the hard conversations, the hard talks, that had to take place. But it comes of no surprise that she was somebody who had, all her life, championed safe, inclusive and respectful workplaces, and she proactively sought to prevent discrimination, sexual harassment and bullying wherever it lived. So of course she was going to be someone on the frontlines of making sure that we clean our own house up as a party before ensuring that we do so on the national stage, in legislation that would come before our respective houses here.</para>
<para>Linda, through her work with the ASU, was instrumental in the campaign around paid family and domestic violence leave. It was wonderful that that legislation got passed while she was here in the Senate. Likewise, she understood well that there was not just a gender pay gap that we had to tackle in Australia but a super gap as well—and a big one, and one that was growing. She said in her first speech:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Superannuation is yet another area where women get a raw deal.</para></quote>
<para>And, my God, she was so on the money again. Of course she was right. The gap in retirement savings between women and men is greater than the gender pay gap. We know there's at least a 25 per cent difference in those balances now. She campaigned fearlessly for reform while she was with the ASU, and she would have been so gratified to see Labor announce superannuation on paid parental leave, which occurred sadly just days after her passing.</para>
<para>In spite of all of Linda's achievements—and I have only just touched on a few and on ones that were meaningful to me—we know Linda would have had a list as long as could be of all the things she still wanted to do. She loved to contribute. She was a solid worker and one that never lost sight of that big picture.</para>
<para>My thoughts are especially with Linda's beloved brother, Michael; her extended family; and her staff, who spoke so highly of her and admired her so deeply. She spoke so highly of them, and they admired her so deeply in return, and I don't underestimate the challenge that is there for all of her staff now. They are hurt and they are grieving. I really want to acknowledge Ben Armstrong, who has had to bear a lot in these last few weeks; the remainder of Linda's staff, Ekta, Ned, Ead and Amit; and all of her comrades who worked by her side, whether it was at the Australian Services Union or it was in the very broad Labor Party in which she played a role in for so many decades.</para>
<para>We've lost a good human, in Linda White. Her selfless service—</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">A division having been called in the House of Representatives—</inline></para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 11:44 to 11:54</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CLAYDON</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>We have lost a good human in Linda White, and our hearts are heavy. But we are forever grateful for her selfless service, for her leadership, for her big thinking, for her courage, and there is no doubt that we are all very much richer for having had Linda in our lives. Vale, Linda White. You will be missed.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr STEVENS</name>
    <name.id>176304</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I, too, rise to pay tribute to Senator Linda White and pass on my condolences to her family and friends and, of course, her colleagues, particularly within the Labor Party room here in Canberra, at her passing. I served with Linda on the National Library of Australia Council. There is a representative from the House of Representatives and a representative from the Senate that serve on that council. The convention is that a member of the government and a member of the opposition have one of each of those positions. Soon after Linda's election, she was appointed as the Senate representative from the Labor Party. In reading her CV, we very much welcomed her selection by the government, given her service in a number of board roles, including, I think, with the MCG Trust in Victoria and a number of arts organisations. It was very much welcomed that we were receiving her experience to serve on the council. Regrettably, that was a much briefer period than all of us would have hoped. But, in the meetings that she attended after her appointment, she made excellent contributions and very insightful contributions. I would particularly like to put on record, on behalf of myself and all members of the council of the National Library, our deepest condolences at her passing and our deepest appreciation for her service to the National Library.</para>
<para>I've been listening to other contributions from members, and they've talked about the work that she did in raising budgetary matters with the ministers that she had excellent access to. With decisions that were made in the last budget that related to the National Library, I'm sure Linda was a very important part of achieving those outcomes, and the council very much appreciated the fact that she, within the government, was a great advocate for the Library, and all of the collecting institutions. I've learnt, through contributions, how much more broadly she was influential within the Labor Party insofar as cultural policy and arts policy were concerned.</para>
<para>I also note, in learning more about her contributions to the labour movement, the Labor Party and the union movement, as someone who has some similar history of having a deep involvement in my own political party, that I think we don't do a good enough job of acknowledging that it's actually quite significant and something to be proud of when someone has served their party in organisational capacities. I understand that Linda was the longest-serving female member of the National Executive of the Labor Party. That's very significant and something that shouldn't be in in any way downplayed. I think it should be promoted and celebrated, and it's an opportunity to acknowledge all the people that serve in significant roles in our political parties.</para>
<para>We are a great, vibrant democracy, and it's thanks to the strength of the political parties that participate in that democracy. The two major parties in our democracy, the Labor Party and the Liberal Party, have been continuously forming stable government in this country since the Second World War. I pay tribute to Linda White's contribution to her party and acknowledge that it's quite significant that people make those sorts of dedicated contributions to the organisation of their parties, because the strength of our parties is the strength of our democracy.</para>
<para>I very much regret that we won't have Linda's ongoing contribution at the National Library. That was the particular interaction that I had with her in her all-too-brief career in the Senate. We very much acknowledge and thank her for her contribution in that way. I associate myself with the remarks of so many other people on the other significant accomplishments of her life. Her time in this place was regrettably cut short, but it was nonetheless a significant contribution. Vale, Linda White.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GORMAN</name>
    <name.id>74519</name.id>
    <electorate>Perth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It is indeed a sad day, to be speaking on the condolence motion for our friend former senator Linda White. She was an incredible champion of democracy. Linda knew that Australia's democracy is something which we should all treasure and be proud of and that we should all take our own responsibility to ensure that we not only protect the next generation but enhance the next generation.</para>
<para>Much has been said in this condolence motion debate about how dedicated our friend Linda White was to ensuring that political parties were well run, knowing that our political party structures are so important to ensure the proper health and functioning of our democracy. Equally, she was very clear that trade unions, which, indeed, pre-date Federation themselves, have such an important role to play in the public policy debate, recognising that policy is better when you listen to the voices of working people and recognising that our electoral debate is strengthened through the engagement of those who represent working Australians.</para>
<para>When she came to this place, to the parliament, Linda was really committed to showing people that democracy works by showing that democracy delivers for them. She did that in large part—and much has been said about it—through her work in ensuring the that the National Anti-Corruption Commission was legislated. I note that not only was it legislated in the first term of a government but, thanks to Linda's work and the work she led with others, it was legislated in the first six months of a government. On something that had taken so long, she knew that to show the Australian people that democracy worked for them and respected their role in delivering on what they had asked the parliament to do we needed to deliver that.</para>
<para>We've seen that in other areas. I was so fortunate to be here for the speech by the Deputy Speaker, the member for Newcastle, talking about the implementation of the <inline font-style="italic">Set the </inline><inline font-style="italic">standard </inline>report, talking about the implementation of enhanced codes of conduct for the Australian Labor Party and talking about something that Linda had campaigned for for so many years, ensuring that this place finally legislated paid domestic and family violence leave. Again, that was something that she had championed for so long and was able to be part of delivering in this government.</para>
<para>She also felt really strongly about protecting those national institutions on which we all rely to do our jobs well and to fulfil our obligations. The National Library, which has just been spoken of, is just one of those institutions which we recognise is stronger for having had Linda serve on the advisory council. I will say a bit more about the National Library in a moment.</para>
<para>I first met Linda White at a national conference of the Australian Labor Party. We got to know each other really well when we served together on the national executive of the Australian Labor Party. Neither of us were in parliament at the time. She was there as an ordinary member and I was there as the party secretary for WA. I will always remember that, when we had to submit our affirmative action reports to the national executive every meeting, it would be Linda who would read those reports diligently. If you had one a figure wrong or in any way it looked like you had not taken it as seriously as it needed to be taken you would be grilled at a national executive meeting. That was just one of those things that I shared with her. She was just so consistent in her expectations about what a great modern and progressive political party should look like.</para>
<para>As has been talked about, at the that 2015 conference we finally got a commitment to 50 per cent women in our preselections and other office bearer positions. It was about saying, 'The time has come; it needs to be done now,' and using all powers of persuasion and determination to ensure that the right thing was done, and it was. We can see in that legacy the benefit to the parliament to this very day in terms of the fantastic talent that is in the parliament because of the changes that Linda ensured were made.</para>
<para>I also remember her being a really strong supporter of the Western Australian branch of the Labor Party when we were going to the 2017 election. She sent people to assist with that campaign, and she was very engaged in ensuring that we were able to do some things that were really important for ASU members in Western Australia, including protecting Western Power and making sure it stayed in public hands. As she did in so many campaigns, she stood with us to ensure that we could protect that institution, that Western Australian asset. She ensured that it wasn't just lip service—that there was action behind it.</para>
<para>Last year I worked quite closely with Linda on rewriting the national platform of the Australian Labor Party. Despite the fact that she had come into parliament and now had an opportunity to contribute to so many other parts of our policy and political debate, she still wanted to make sure those foundational principles—that is, a strong platform of a strong party of government—were done well, and I really appreciate that. Some parts of rewriting a national platform of a political party are not always fun, but I now think back very warmly to the great advice that Linda gave me in that process.</para>
<para>We know that Linda was an incredible advocate for ensuring the proper scrutiny of delegated legislation. She was incredibly passionate about that. I hope I'm not going to breach a caucus rule in mentioning this, but she did encourage us—and I was pleased to work with her in delivering it—to change to the standard caucus submission template to ensure that we properly recognised delegated legislation. From now on, every time I see that in the caucus template I will think fondly of Linda and of her commitment to ensuring that we take all of the work that we do seriously and thoroughly. That, again, was a hallmark of her contribution in this place and beforehand.</para>
<para>Last year, she organised a tour of the National Library for a range of members. She was so proud to serve on that board. She was so proud of what the library did and such a passionate advocate for what the library needed to do for the future. She had thought very carefully about who her fellow library lovers were, who would come one early morning to see the library. When we arrived in the reading room of the library, there were items that she had asked them to prepare that corresponded to the electorates of every member who attended. I got to see a range of Perth pictorials from the 1920s, and she'd also found that the library had some of my old election flyers, amongst other things. She had ensured that we each had something that spoke directly to us, to appreciate the time that we'd spent there. It was one little way of showing how much she thought about others and cared for others.</para>
<para>I want to speak a little bit about Linda's contribution to the union movement. She and I had somewhat similar starts in our engagement with the formal union movement. Our first jobs were at McDonald's, and we both joined our first union while working at McDonald's. In a similar vein, we both found that there was a lot of work to do for the union that was working to ensure proper representation, support and wages for McDonald's workers. The second union I joined, indeed, was the ASU, at a time when I think Linda had just started her role as the assistant national secretary. Linda's contribution to the union movement, which is one of the things that makes Australia the great country it is today, is incredible: 25 years as Assistant National Secretary of the Australian Services Union, 15 years on the ACTU executive and, in the party that proudly stands for working people, 20 years on the Australian Labor Party National Executive. In part because of the equal pay case that Linda took forward and, ultimately, was part of successfully winning in 2012, alongside state and federal governments, I know that the lives of people in Perth are better for her union service, particularly those who work for the councils in Perth, Bassendean, Bayswater, Vincent and Stirling.</para>
<para>I want to very quickly highlight a few things that really stuck with me about how Linda spoke about the work that we do in this place. In her first speech, she said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">For some people, their pathway in life is determined by the circumstances of their birth. Governments, however, have the power to open up new choices and opportunities that would otherwise remain out of reach.</para></quote>
<para>I think there are many great summings-up of what the purpose of a Labor government is, but, for me, that is one of them. It is actually that opening of opportunity and making things that some people felt were never possible for them, whatever their circumstances of birth, possible. She showed that time and time again in her—</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">A division having been called in the House of Representatives—</inline></para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 12:10 to 12:21</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GORMAN</name>
    <name.id>74519</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>As I conclude my remarks, I couldn't conclude without noting the incredible work that was done in delivering for some 16,000 Ansett workers who lost their jobs. Thanks to the incredible work of Linda White and her many years of fighting for them, workers were able to retain so many entitlements. The fact that the achievement, coming out of that corporate collapse, was noted by people across the political divide speaks again to how well she was regarded both as a senator and as a union leader.</para>
<para>In conclusion, I want to pass on my condolences to her brother, Michael; to Linda's family; to her other family, the ASU family; to all the ASU members; and to those who served with her on so many boards, from the MCG to ACMI and so many others. It is a huge loss that so many across Australia are feeling right now and will feel for many, many years to come. I want to echo the words of the Prime Minister that, at this really sad time, what will outlast is our pride in all that she did and all that she achieved, and we will remember her warmth, her wisdom and all of her achievements. We will continue to commit ourselves in this place to doing what she did when she was here: defending our institutions, supporting them for the next generation and defending our democracy.</para>
<para>For those of us in the Labor family, we will remind ourselves of all of those people who rely upon Labor governments, rely upon the sorts of people that we elect to parliament and rely upon us to do what we said we would do to show that democracy indeed does serve the Australian people. Once again, vale, Linda White.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GOSLING</name>
    <name.id>245392</name.id>
    <electorate>Solomon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I join all previous speakers and parliamentary colleagues across this chamber and the other place in expressing my heartfelt condolences at the passing of our friend and comrade Senator Linda White. As anyone watching would have seen, the whole Labor family and those from other political parties that saw the good and integrity in her were shocked and heartbroken, as she was truly a formidable person and an indefatigable champion of working Australians and the Labor movement.</para>
<para>As a young lawyer, she played her part in tackling injustices that were only just beginning to be confronted, and I'm talking about confronting horrendous wrongs like corruption in the police force and institutional child abuse. She saw that those things needed to be confronted and she went about being part of righting those wrongs.</para>
<para>She started as a rank-and-file activist and became the assistant national secretary of the Australian Services Union, where her legacy is massive, from protecting workers' entitlements in the Ansett collapse—that's one example—to leading the campaign for equal pay for social and community service workers to fighting for the right to income for members feeling the impacts of COVID.</para>
<para>The longest serving woman on the national executive of the ALP, Linda was absolutely central to the affirmative action reforms which led to our government, the Albanese government, being the first-ever government with a majority of female members in Australian history. So, as you can see, our caucus was literally shaped by Linda's activism and burning desire for social justice and good governance.</para>
<para>She was a loyal servant of the administration of the Labor Party federally and in Victoria, and it was a good day for the ALP when Linda put up her hand to enter the Senate. Although in the end she wasn't in the Senate for long, she made powerful use of the time that she had, really making a profound impact on matters as varied as the National Anti-Corruption Commission and better access to superannuation for Australian women.</para>
<para>Linda was someone who absolutely loved our party. She loved the union movement and the state of Victoria. She was an advocate of a big-hearted government, and she was adept at the power of collective action to set right the life of the city. She was very passionate about Melbourne and the MCG and about other iconic places in the great state of Victoria. She was political, absolutely political, but in the very noblest sense of that term. Passionate and always speaking her mind, never lacking moral courage, yearning to serve a cause greater than herself without taking credit or asserting her status—those are just some of the qualities that we all admired in Linda.</para>
<para>But it's right and important, as other members have done, that we also honour the broad and curious mind that was Linda White's outside of her better known political sphere. We've heard about her love of libraries, and one regret that I have is that I never got to speak with her about her love of libraries. When I was first elected in 2016, one of the first things I did was start the Parliamentary Friends of GLAM—galleries, libraries, archives and museums—libraries being such important cultural institutions. Linda was a massive supporter of libraries and a patron of the arts. Among the many organisations mourning her passing, of course, is our own National Library of Australia, and Linda sat on that council. She was a very avid reader and loved to discuss the latest works at the book club.</para>
<para>She is mourned, too, by the Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation, and she would have been stoked to see an announcement from our government today about further empowerment of midwives.</para>
<para>She was a titan of the union movement, and, as I said, a lover of the creative arts; of good food and beautiful gardens; of bread and roses, as the Prime Minister put it; and of the sun drenched light that falls not only on the best but on the most ordinary days in our lives and even on the worst days, if we look right. So let us never tire of remembering not only today, when it's easier, but especially when the logic of political contest takes over, that beauty oft lays hidden, even in a place like this. And let Linda teach us that, instead of inspiring the very worst in ourselves, the fragility at the heart of this human experiment of ours can also bring out the better angels of our nature, forging the most unexpected of friendships, connecting in moments of shared vulnerability and appreciating each other, and expressing that appreciation as well, while we still have this incredible privilege.</para>
<para>My thoughts are with Linda's family, particularly her brother Michael, her extended family and all her loved ones, her staff and comrades at the ASU and across our party in Victoria, where I first became an ALP member 20 years ago. Finally, what always impresses me about people like Linda is that they are mentors for other. They take on young people, or people who are new to the movement or the party, and mentor them through. That's how we build a stronger country. Linda always took opportunities to mentor people, and through her mentees, her legacy and her impact in Australia will live on. Vale, Linda White.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>ADJOURNMENT</title>
        <page.no>114</page.no>
        <type>ADJOURNMENT</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Asylum Seekers</title>
          <page.no>114</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BATES</name>
    <name.id>300246</name.id>
    <electorate>Brisbane</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today I want to share a story of a young man in my electorate who came to Australia as an asylum seeker who has had his life sitting in limbo since. These are his words:</para>
<quote><para class="block">My name is Mohammed Hasani. I want you to hear my words. I arrived in Australia nearly 14 years ago as a 12-year-old boy. When I arrived, I was a child. I didn't know anything about the government or Australian rules around immigration. I just wondered if Australia was a safe country, and knew that my father, brother and I came here to be set. My country is dangerous and there is no future there for children. I knew how to play—I was a child; I didn't make a choice to come to Australia. I didn't decide to leave my country. I was a child and my family were trying to keep me safe.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I was surprised about how I was treated. Locked up in detention, treated badly by the Australian government. I didn't come here to make any trouble; I came here to find safety and build a future. My entire future has consistently been beaten down and destroyed because of the government. I have been away from my mother, my entire family for almost 14 years. I have not seen my mother since I was a child. My heart is in pain for her. How is this fair? I feel I am constantly trying to make a life but building towards a future that is blank.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I want everyone to listen to my story, and so many people have the same situation and the same story, young people especially. I ask why I am being punished for a decision that was not mine. I came here as a child. I went to school; I graduated, and my dreams of becoming a police officer or firefighter, a computer technician, getting married, having children and having a home have all been consistently shattered.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">My future is blank, my life and future completely in the hands of government and policymakers. I did not come here to do any wrong. I was a child. I'm now almost 27 years old—a grown man—and still my hands are tied. I cannot do anything; I cannot move forward. I keep getting told to wait, wait, wait: just wait for change. But when is this nightmare going to be over for me? Do you know what it feels like to have your entire future being crushed between two rocks? Or being held over a cliff's edge, able to be taken away at any time? When will this fear end for me and for other people in my situation?</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">In my country I have no future. I have lived in Australia for more than half my life. In Australia, I have no future. While I'm physically safe, my life is being taken away from me and I am dying slowly each day. I thought Australia upheld human rights. How is this upholding the right to be safe, to belong, to live—to live in a country and contribute to this country?</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">My father brought my brother and I here. Do you know how hard it is to start a whole new life, especially when we have no rights and are not wanted here? I live each day anticipating when this will end and in fear of the life I have managed to build, despite the government's cruelty, being ripped from underneath me. When I heard there was going to be an election coming, I, and many people in my situation, had so much hope for change and a quicker resolution to end our suffering so we can live in peace, but I still don't see any change for me or for others like me. I cannot live like this forever. When I came here, I was a child. Now I am a man. How many more years, how old will I be? How much more of my life will pass before the government decides to make changes?</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I want you all to listen to my story and make it so that no child will ever have to face this situation again. If you cannot give me permanent residency or a visa with rights, I want you at least to give me the opportunity to work and contribute to my community so I can have some hope for the future: for freedom, for the chance to live a normal life like everyone else. Despite over a decade of suffering, we will always have hope in the Australian government to do the right thing. I will always have hope. I just want you to think about the situation I am in. Can anyone live a life like this, with no future or no hope?</para></quote>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East</title>
          <page.no>114</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SITOU</name>
    <name.id>298121</name.id>
    <electorate>Reid</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It has been more than six months since the horrific 7 October attacks committed by the terrorist organisation Hamas. It has been six months of pain, despair and anxiety for the families of the Israeli hostages who remain in captivity. The uncertainty and fear of not knowing the fate of their loved ones must be gut-wrenching. And it has been six months of unconscionable human suffering in Gaza. Innocent civilians stuck in Gaza are being denied access to food, water and basic medicines. It is clear that what is happening there is a humanitarian catastrophe of unbelievable proportions. Recent reports suggest that around 30,000 Palestinians have lost their lives, with more than 11,000 of them children. The World Bank estimates that half of the 2.3 million people in Gaza are at risk of famine. A BBC analysis suggests that between 50 to 60 per cent of the buildings across the Gaza Strip have been damaged or destroyed.</para>
<para>The destruction of Gaza, will haunt our collective humanity and it must end. Every country has a right and an obligation to defend its people, but the protection of civilian lives and the respect for international law must be upheld. The Australian government has joined other countries around the world to vote at the United Nations, calling for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire. We see that as a critical and urgent step on the path to a permanent ceasefire. We will continue to be part of the international diplomatic efforts to bring this conflict to an end, because no-one wins in this conflict. The people who are paying the heaviest price are not Hamas; it's the innocent Palestinian civilians who are the tragic victims in this conflict.</para>
<para>It is right that Israel seeks to retrieve the hostages taken by Hamas terrorists, and it is true that Hamas has no regard for the civilian casualties in the way it embeds itself. The way this conflict is conducted matters more than ever. A ground offensive in Rafah, home to 1.7 million Palestinians taking refuge, would be catastrophic. It must not happen. There are increasingly few safe spaces for people in Gaza to go to. It is inconceivable then for Israel to attack this area. With the humanitarian situation in Gaza already dire, bombing Rafah would make a catastrophic situation even worse. As the foreign minister has already said to the Israeli government, do not go down this path.</para>
<para>Australia's influence in the region is not as a central player, but as a respected voice we continue to use our influence to advocate for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire and the return of hostages. I'm pleased we have restored funding to UNRWA, an organisation that provides incredibly important humanitarian assistance to the entire region. They have taken allegations against some of their employees seriously and have acted swiftly to remove those staff and to investigate the allegations. The Australian government will continue to use our voice to advocate for urgent humanitarian assistance to reach Palestinians in Gaza and to address the refugee crisis in the region.</para>
<para>In March the Minister for Foreign Affairs announced Australia would aid Jordan and the United Arab Emirates in their efforts to provide vital humanitarian support to civilians in Gaza. This includes the deployment of a Royal Australian Air Force Globemaster to assist with humanitarian air drops, an additional $4 million to UNICEF and $2 million to the United Nations Senior Humanitarian and Reconstruction Coordinator. These contributions take Australia's total humanitarian aid for the current conflict to $52.5 million, on top of the $20.6 million already allocated to UNRWA as part of Australia's core funding for this financial year.</para>
<para>But, for this aid to help people, it must be allowed in. There is an enormous humanitarian need in Gaza right now. We are faced with reports of imminent famine. Despite the international community saying that aid will make a difference, it is clear that not enough food, water and basic medicines are getting into the territory. Israel must let more humanitarian aid through. It would be unconscionable not to.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Toowoomba Sports Ground</title>
          <page.no>115</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HAMILTON</name>
    <name.id>291387</name.id>
    <electorate>Groom</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Whilst the recent review by Graham Quirk into Olympic funding largely focused its attention on Brisbane and what stadium is going to be used, the other big story locally for us is that the Toowoomba Sports Ground is no longer considered a viable option. The independent study found that there was no identified legacy provided by the planned upgrade, worth some $80 million. This is the only regional venue that has been recommended against being upgraded.</para>
<para>This comes as absolutely no surprise to me, having extensively doorknocked, phone canvassed, held mobile offices, run a town hall at the bowls club and run a survey on the issue. Locals have significant concerns about the impacts of these proposed upgrades. Up until my intervention, they had absolutely no means of getting those concerns heard, of expressing them. Once I became aware of them, I raised those concerns with every level of government, demanding simply that my community's voices be heard.</para>
<para>These were significant concerns. This is a temporary upgrade to a stadium. That means that you don't have to put in place noise prevention or light prevention. You don't have to concern yourself with the impacts of parking, of dust created. A similar sort of temporary structure was built for QEII back in the eighties in Brisbane, for the Commonwealth Games, and it still stands today. This was going to have a significant impact on a local community. The strongest concerns came from the bowls club, the tennis club and the croquet club, because it was quite clear that their entire future was being put at risk by these upgrades. I point out that the bowls club is 123 years old, and the Range Tennis Club is the oldest in Queensland.</para>
<para>There were as many submissions about the Toowoomba Sports Ground as there were about the Gabba. That's extraordinary for a city the size of Toowoomba compared to Brisbane. The percentage of people who were concerned is significant, and 92 per cent of the responses were opposed to the upgrade. So I'm glad to see the review come to a position of common sense, clearly pointing out that there are no legacy benefits to building a stadium right in the middle of suburbia.</para>
<para>Amazingly, extraordinarily, our council put in a submission supporting this. How tone deaf they were on the issue I don't know. I thank the three councillors who strongly spoke against this, particularly Nancy Sommerfield, who will be a great loss to the council, for standing up and speaking up for the people of the region that she is there to represent.</para>
<para>What we have now is the opportunity, very quickly, to provide that committee with some alternatives that we can put Olympic funding towards that will leave a legacy for our region.</para>
<para class="italic"><inline font-style="italic">A division having been called in the House of Representatives—</inline></para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 12:44 to 12:56</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HAMILTON</name>
    <name.id>291387</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>A review of the funding of the sportsground has found that it has no identified legacy benefits and it's effectively killed the project off. It's incumbent upon the Toowoomba community to get together and provide some alternative options so that we can ensure that that $80 million of Olympic infrastructure spend stays in the Toowoomba region. I commend the <inline font-style="italic">Chronicle</inline> for leading a very strong campaign and getting that conversation going very quickly.</para>
<para>There are three options that have come to the fore, and I think they are all worthy of further exploration. The equestrian centre of excellence is the first one that has been raised. I think this is a great solution for our region. Clearly we have a strong equestrian community in Toowoomba, but further the thoroughbred racing community in our region is very strong. The opportunity to provide infrastructure that will create a legacy for that region is right there.</para>
<para>The second one that's been raised is an expansion of the Clive Berghofer Arena. With basketball and netball being huge sports in our region, this one is a no-brainer as well. I think that so many in our community would love to get behind it.</para>
<para>The final one, and the one that I think speaks strongest, would be a fit-for-purpose athletic centre. Olympian and Allora boy Matt Denny said he had to leave our region altogether to pursue his Olympic dreams, and that's not good enough in a city like Toowoomba. We are Australia's largest regional city. We should be able to see that sort of investment and that sort of opportunity created for our kids. That is the sort of legacy that we want to see from that infrastructure spend.</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 : 58 to 13 : 11</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Tropical Cyclone Megan</title>
          <page.no>116</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SCRYMGOUR</name>
    <name.id>F2S</name.id>
    <electorate>Lingiari</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We are used to weather emergencies in the Northern Territory and the Indian Ocean Territories, but, once again, Mother Nature has shocked us with the sudden ferocity of her power. We are reminded of how vulnerable and, at times, helpless we are in the face of the forces she can throw at us. This time we're talking about Tropical Cyclone Megan. Over the last several days, it has challenged two proud and resilient remote communities in the Lingiari electorate—first Groote Eylandt and then Borroloola.</para>
<para>My Lingiari electorate also includes the Indian island territories of Christmas Island and the Cocos (Keeling) Islands, which had already been threatened by Tropical Cyclone Anggrek. Although the cyclone ending up passing to the west, the associated severe weather has had a significant impact, particularly at Cocos. I will talk about that and a number of other issues related to the Christmas and Cocos (Keeling) islands at further adjournment speeches. They need support now, as both communities have had major damage to infrastructure, and areas of land have been destroyed.</para>
<para>In regard to Groote, the communities of Angurugu and Alyangula were the first in the Territory to bear the brunt of the weather front, and that was over the weekend, starting on Friday. On this occasion, there has been flooding of the mine pits and disruption of the road access between the mining lease areas and processing plant. Even more concerning is the situation at the wharf at Alyangula, where a huge transport ship has slammed into and damaged the wharf structure. The ship is carrying 41,140 metric tonnes of ore, 1,070 tonnes of low-sulphur fuel and 109 tonnes of diesel. South32 have reassured their workers and the public that remediation work will be done as soon as the weather permits and that the regular work of the mine will recommence.</para>
<para>In the meantime, volunteers from the communities of Alyangula and Angurugu have displayed fantastic kindness and resourcefulness in difficult circumstances. Power was cut from Friday to Tuesday, and, when the water came back on, some homes were only getting it at low pressure. I want to give a big shout-out to Percy Bishop from Groote Broadcasting, who was able to muster people up and make sure that nobody went without. Supplies of food and diesel were brought in by barge and will soon address supply shortages.</para>
<para>In relation to Borroloola, it was clear that the cyclone was going to hit, and I want to pay tribute to the ever-vigilant and capable Minister for Emergency Management, Senator Murray Watt, who worked throughout the weekend and pulled together the Commonwealth side of the relief plan. This plan involved community evacuations using ADF planes. Weather conditions on Monday did not allow the planes to land, and the cyclone passed through. The amount of rain which was dumped on this remote area of the country in the course of the cyclone's movements has been enormous, and the ongoing risk is of flooding.</para>
<para>ADF planes arranged as part of the Commonwealth contribution to the emergency response have already flown from Borroloola and taken a number of residents, together with other vulnerable citizens, to safety in Darwin. Other residents have moved to locations on higher ground, and both Borroloola and the nearby McArthur River mine have been waiting to see how bad it is going to get.</para>
<para>I want to pay tribute to staff within the minister's office: Tom, Simone, Laura and all of the people who have kept the communications and information flowing. I want to give a shout-out to the police and fire and emergency services in the Northern Territory. It is tough. I also want to acknowledge my colleague Senator Malarndirri McCarthy, whose family has been seriously affected in Borroloola and who has had to go home. I want to acknowledge all of the residents, and there are three other communities—Kalkarindji/Daguragu, Timber Creek and Pigeon Hole—who are being evacuated for the third time this year. Resilience is very low, and people are not happy, but the volume of water that has been dumped in the Top End has not been seen at this scale before. It certainly adds weight to climate change and that our seasons are changing.</para>
<para>I give a shout-out to everybody, including the communities. We are there and we will stand to help you.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Federation Chamber adjourned at 13:16</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
  </fedchamb.xscript>
</hansard>