﻿
<hansard noNamespaceSchemaLocation="../../hansard.xsd" version="2.2">
  <session.header>
    <date>2024-06-04</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="">Tuesday, 4 June 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 12:00, 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>Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2024-2025</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="r7186" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2024-2025</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report from Federation Chamber</title>
            <page.no>1</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In accordance with the resolution agreed to on 28 May 2024, Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2024-2025 is returned to the House for further consideration.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>1</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Reference to Federation Chamber</title>
            <page.no>1</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In accordance with the resolution agreed to on 28 May 2024, the bill stands referred to the Federation Chamber, and further consideration of the bill is made an order of the day for a later hour this day.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Digital ID Bill 2024, Digital ID (Transitional and Consequential Provisions) Bill 2023, Financial Framework (Supplementary Powers) Amendment Bill 2024, Agriculture Legislation Amendment (Modernising Administrative Processes) Bill 2024, National Cancer Screening Register Amendment Bill 2024, Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Military Invalidity Payments Means Testing) Bill 2024, Parliamentary Business Resources Legislation Amendment (Review Implementation and Other Measures) Bill 2024, Fair Work Amendment Bill 2024, Health Legislation Amendment (Removal of Requirement for a Collaborative Arrangement) Bill 2024, New Vehicle Efficiency Standard Bill 2024, New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2024, Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards and Other Measures) Bill 2023, Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Accountability and Fairness) Bill 2023, Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 2) Bill 2024, Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Bill 2024, Administrative Review Tribunal Bill 2024</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">
            <p>
              <a href="s1404" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Digital ID Bill 2024</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <a href="s1405" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Digital ID (Transitional and Consequential Provisions) Bill 2023</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <a href="s1408" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Financial Framework (Supplementary Powers) Amendment Bill 2024</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <a href="r7160" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Agriculture Legislation Amendment (Modernising Administrative Processes) Bill 2024</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <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>
              <a href="r7152" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Military Invalidity Payments Means Testing) Bill 2024</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <a href="r7174" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Parliamentary Business Resources Legislation Amendment (Review Implementation and Other Measures) Bill 2024</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <a href="r7155" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Fair Work Amendment Bill 2024</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <a href="r7164" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Health Legislation Amendment (Removal of Requirement for a Collaborative Arrangement) Bill 2024</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <a href="r7182" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">New Vehicle Efficiency Standard Bill 2024</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <a href="r7183" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2024</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <a href="r7116" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards and Other Measures) Bill 2023</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <a href="r7107" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Accountability and Fairness) Bill 2023</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <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>
              <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 2024</span>
                </p>
              </a>
            </p>
            <a href="r7117" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Administrative Review Tribunal Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Assent</title>
            <page.no>1</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Defence Amendment (Parliamentary Joint Committee on Defence) Bill 2024</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="r7201" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Defence Amendment (Parliamentary Joint Committee on Defence) Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>1</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HASTIE</name>
    <name.id>260805</name.id>
    <electorate>Canning</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's no secret that I've long advocated for a joint defence committee modelled after the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security. It's an important piece of parliamentary oversight and transparency. I think it's also important that parliamentarians deepen their knowledge of defence and strategic issues through such a forum. I'm glad to see this bill, the Defence Amendment (Parliamentary Joint Committee on Defence) Bill 2024. On the surface, it looks good. However, today I want to foreshadow that the coalition will be moving an amendment to this bill to ensure that only members of the government and the opposition are able to serve on the committee. At the moment, in the bill it says that there will be seven government members and six non-government members, and there is nothing to preclude Greens from serving on this committee. We won't compromise on our national interest and our national security, and we think it is contrary to the Australian national interest to potentially allow the Greens onto this committee.</para>
<para>I refer to the Greens platform online, where they say, 'The Greens will cancel defence contracts, and cut defence spending.' Then, as you find your way down their manifesto, you see other things. The Greens plan includes 'Renegotiate the US alliance to secure a new relationship focused on making us a better global citizen' and 'Close all military bases that foreign militaries have set up in this country'. Of course, that would include Pine Gap, a really critical part of our alliance. It would also include the closure of any defence establishments in Darwin that support the current footprint of the Marine Expeditionary Force, which works so closely with the Australian Defence Force. Of course, in the future, HMAS <inline font-style="italic">Stirling</inline> will become Submarine Rotational Force—West. We'll have up to four nuclear submarines from the US and the UK in 2027.</para>
<para>The Greens are trenchantly opposed to this, and I fear—as do my colleagues behind me—that having the Greens on this committee would be strongly contrary to the national interest.</para>
<para>I also refer to Senator David Pocock's statement on Gaza yesterday. In it he calls for Australia to cut all military ties with Israel. Israel is the only functioning democracy in the Middle East—imperfect, I grant that—and they are a close ally of this country. They also have the right to self-defence, which they have been exercising since 7 October after the brutal rapes and murders conducted by Hamas, which is a listed terrorist organisation in this country. To have someone like Senator Pocock, who's an otherwise nice chap, suggest we should cut military ties with Israel is very, very troubling. It's also a troubling signal that potentially someone like Senator Pocock, with these views, could be serving on this committee.</para>
<para>That's why we'll move this amendment, and, if the amendment fails, I'm also foreshadowing that the coalition sadly won't be supporting this bill, because this is a great opportunity and it's an important piece of infrastructure. I hope, therefore, that the Albanese government will come to an agreement that we should make these amendments and make it so that only seven government and six opposition members serve on this committee.</para>
<para>I'll have more to say in due course, but I wanted to make our position clear to the parliament.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (More Support in the Safety Net) 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="r7197" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (More Support in the Safety Net) Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>2</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SUKKAR</name>
    <name.id>242515</name.id>
    <electorate>Deakin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We'll be supporting this bill. Sadly, two years into this government, Australians are paying the price for a succession of bad decisions and the wrong priorities from this government. We'll be supporting these measures because Australians are poorer after two years of a Labor government. Australians have rarely in our history looked back from one election to the next and—without overstating it, without overblowing it, without trying to throw all the political rhetoric out there—been able to say, 'We are actually poorer than we were at the last election.' That is sadly what is going to happen at the time of the next election.</para>
<para>We'll support these very minor proposals from the government, increasing Commonwealth rental assistance in schedule 1 of this bill, and in schedules 2 and 3 making some very minor amendments including some flexibility amendments to JobSeeker arrangements, and for those on carer payments and their ability to work hours and providing greater flexibility. Pretty uncontroversial stuff, but a bandaid on a bullet wound here of what is being felt by Australians throughout this country.</para>
<para>If you've got a mortgage in Australia today, you are $35,000 a year worse off. After three budgets we've seen terrible stewardship of this economy. We now have core inflation which is, I think, even troubling the hardheads in the government that we now have homegrown inflation. In the immediate aftermath of COVID, clearly the Australian economy was hit by inflation that had flowed through the supply chain and material shortages that were a global phenomenon. We wore that pain, as did every other trading nation in the world.</para>
<para>But what's occurring now is that we have homegrown inflation. Whilst inflation is going backwards in most competitor economies, or in most economies that we would compare ourselves to, we now have inflation remaining stubbornly where it is. That means interest rates will have to be higher for longer. That's an immutable fact, and it doesn't matter how much the Treasurer tries to spin this. The reason why this is relevant to this bill is that, ultimately, the Social Services portfolio is trying to paper over the cracks that are emerging because of the terrible mismanagement of this economy. The truth is that no social services budget or portfolio measure can ultimately paper over the gaping cracks occurring in this economy now, which are hitting families extraordinarily hard.</para>
<para>The truth is that food is up by more than 10 per cent and housing is up by 14 per cent. This year—from April to April—for housing alone, we saw rents up by nearly eight per cent. Since this government has been in power, we've seen rents increase by more than 20 per cent on average. If the average is 20 per cent, I can say right now that there are many parts of this country where rents are up by 25, 30, 35 or 40 per cent. There's nothing that the social services minister can do, even with a modest increase in Commonwealth rental assistance, which can address those issues. There's nothing the social services minister can do to assist a family which has an average mortgage and is paying $35,000 a year more in this country. That doesn't even account for those families—particularly those in metropolitan Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane—in most of our metro areas who have mortgages well above the average. These are people who will, literally, be spending tens of thousands of dollars more just to service their mortgages to put roofs over the heads of their families.</para>
<para>We're supporting this bill, but what Australians don't want to see is the self-congratulatory patting on the back here, which we see every single day, by the government about how wonderfully they're doing things for the Australian people. People are struggling out there. People are struggling in a way that I've not seen in my lifetime. Sadly, this is something that we often see with federal Labor governments. Labor always says, 'We just have very bad timing.' The poor old Labor governments just have bad timing! They think that they just inherit these difficult circumstances. No, they create the difficult circumstances. The lack of a budget strategy here and the lack of a strategy to put downward pressure on inflation and to reduce interest rates means that there's nothing this social services minister can do to address and alleviate the issues being faced.</para>
<para>We were promised by her Prime Minister before the election, on 97 occasions, no less—97 times!—that he would reduce power prices by $275 each and every year. That was to below the level it was in 2022. We now have power prices up by nearly a couple of thousand dollars since that time. We all thought it was pretty heroic for the now Prime Minister to make those promises before the election. Some of us wondered if there was something he knew that we didn't, or if he had something up his sleeve that we didn't. Well, no, the truth is that the now Prime Minister clearly made a decision to say whatever he needed to say to deceive Australians into voting for him, with him knowing that he would not be able to deliver it afterwards. What do we see now? We see electricity up by 20 per cent and we see gas up by 25 per cent. Again, there's nothing that the social services minister can do, on her own, to address the pain that is being felt by Australians.</para>
<para>I, like many people in this chamber, meet people now; I meet constituents who choose not to put the heating on because they can't afford to. I meet constituents who, in summer, will not run an air conditioner because they just cannot afford to do so. Is this seriously Labor's vision for this country?</para>
<para>We see through other budget measures from this government a complete lack of understanding as to the impact they're having because they seem so self-satisfied. They have this air of 'Australians have never had it better' and that, somehow, Australians should be grateful for what they're doing. This social services minister thinks she deserves a pat on the back because of the increase in Commonwealth rental assistance that's contained in this bill. Every single one of those recipients of Commonwealth rental assistance is worse off because their rents have gone up by more than the assistance has gone up. They take with one hand and give a little bit back with the other, and say, 'We want a pat on the back for that transaction.' That's not how it works. People are worse off because of the decisions of this government. The social services minister sits around that cabinet table and signs up to all the policies that have delivered the wreckage we're seeing.</para>
<para>We see the government, in the wake of our budget reply, criticising our calls to reduce migration to free up 100,000 homes for Australians. We think that, first and foremost, homes are there for Australians; that's what homes should be there for. We support a decent migration program, but it's got to be a migration program in our interests. It's got to be a migration program that works for Australians. We've had world-record levels of migration from this government—nearly a million migrants at a time when only 265,000 homes were built. You don't need to be a Rhodes scholar or a housing expert or an economist to realise you can't bring in, in the middle of a housing crisis, a million new people in two years when you're building fewer homes than were built by the former coalition government. House builds are going down and migration has been ramped up to 10 out of 10—a million migrants when only 265,000 homes have been built.</para>
<para>Hidden in that statistic of 265,000, by the way, is that a significant portion of those homes are just replacements of old homes. If you have a knockdown rebuild, that's considered a new home—but you haven't increased housing stock at all; you've just knocked one down and replaced it with a new one. The numbers hide the story that things are much worse than that—and what do we see? We see a terrible housing crisis. We see rents going up at unmitigated levels. And the government say, 'Give us a pat on the back, because we're going to give a little bit more in Commonwealth rental assistance to a very small proportion of the population.' The vast majority, more than 90 per cent of renters, don't receive Commonwealth rental assistance. What on earth is there in the budget for them? What on earth is going to alleviate their housing costs? Clearly, nothing in this bill.</para>
<para>Whilst supporting the bill, we're not going to be throwing confetti at this government on any of these changes. We are disappointed to see this budget failed on virtually every single metric. The social services component was not able to rescue a terrible budget—a budget that sunk like a stone. As a former Assistant Treasurer, I can tell you that you would spend day in, day out selling your budget for weeks and, in some cases, months. You barely hear a peep out of this government on their budget, understandably. I suspect members opposite went back to their electorates and probably did what they do here; their first instinct was to go back to their electorates and try and get a pat on the back from their constituents, and their constituents probably looked at them with a quizzical look on their faces as if to suggest: 'You seriously think we're going to give you a pat on the back for that—for that budget you stumped up and for this economy you've delivered for us? Absolutely no way.' Since getting that reaction, I think it's understandable it's not something this government will talk about it. The truth is they failed Australians. Your first priority from an economic perspective in this country is to improve the lot for households. Your first job—in fact, it's the reason why every single one of us is here—is ultimately to provide opportunities for prosperity to the next generation of Australians that are just a little bit better than what we had handed to us. That's the golden rule of politics. It's the golden rule of what you need to do.</para>
<para>I will finish where I started. After two years of an Albanese government, Australians are poorer than at the beginning. That's not open for interpretation. It's not an area that you would be able to credibly politically debate. Australians are poorer than they were two years ago. The dollar doesn't go as far as it did two years ago. Their housing costs are demonstrably higher than they were two years ago. Their real wages have gone backwards under this government. On every single metric, Australians are doing it tougher. So the social services minister and this government are not going to get a pat on the back from us for giving a tiny bit back with one hand of what they have taken with the other over the past two years from those households and those Australians who are really struggling.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Health Insurance Legislation Amendment (Assignment of Medicare Benefits) Bill 2024</title>
          <page.no>4</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="r7194" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Health Insurance Legislation Amendment (Assignment of Medicare Benefits) Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>4</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LEY</name>
    <name.id>00AMN</name.id>
    <electorate>Farrer</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Health Insurance Legislation Amendment (Assignment of Medicare Benefits) Bill 2024 makes a series of amendments to the Health Insurance Act 1973 to update the assignment-of-benefit process which underpins bulk-billed Medicare services and simplify billing. The amendments will remove some of the current rigid paperwork requirements to allow for more streamlined processing of MBS bulk-billing claims, particularly for telehealth consults. It will reduce regulatory and administrative burdens for healthcare providers who provide bulk-billed services, private health insurers and approved billing agents. This will ensure the payment of Medicare benefits are aligned with modern practice and reduce administrative burden for health providers. The coalition welcomes the reduction in red tape that will be achieved by this legislation. We support these sensible amendments which will streamline processes for healthcare providers and private health insurers.</para>
<para>Although we support this legislation and its intended purpose, we are concerned that the government has stated that this bill represents more progress on the government's commitment to strengthen Medicare, because it has become clear that, under the Albanese Labor government, Medicare has only been weakened. Labor is overseeing a primary healthcare crisis that means it's never been harder or more expensive to see a doctor. In fact, bulk-billing has collapsed since the last election. In Minister Butler's own words, bulk-billing is the 'beating heart' of Medicare, but the reality is it has plummeted by 11 per cent since Labor came into government, falling from 88.5 per cent when the coalition left government to 77 per cent under Minister Butler. This is the worst GP bulk-billing rate in a decade.</para>
<para>Recent data from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare has also shown that Medicare is now covering the lowest percentage of GP fees on record, at 84 per cent in April 2024. This means that Australians are paying the highest amount of fees to see a doctor in history, and this is happening in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis. At a time when Australians are already facing skyrocketing cost pressures, we know that this is causing many families to choose between seeing their doctor and paying their bills. In fact, last year, 1.2 million Australians avoided seeing a doctor due to concerns over costs. We know that, since then, the costs have only increased and it has only become harder to access a bulk-billed doctor's appointment. This financial year, we have seen three million fewer GP visits as these pressures force Australians to put off seeing a GP. Australians can't afford to have this primary care crisis continue. Not only is it pushing up out-of-pocket expenses for families but we also know that a weakened primary care system only increases the pressure on our already overburdened hospitals. With less access to the early intervention provided by primary health care, more and more patients will be pushed towards the hospital system. This is particularly concerning given that 2022-23 saw the worst average emergency department wait times in a decade, while the wait times for elective surgery have almost doubled compare to 20 years ago.</para>
<para>Australians' access to critical health care is increasingly at risk, and the government must start taking real action to address this—real action like putting downward pressure on inflation, which we know is impacting general practice as it is other small businesses across the country; and real action like addressing the severe GP workforce shortages that are underpinning the current challenges in primary care. For more than a year the coalition has been calling for the government to implement an urgent and comprehensive national workforce strategy for the entire care sector, but they are refusing to listen. Until these workforce shortages are adequately addressed, Australians will not have timely and affordable access to a GP. Once again, the coalition supports this legislation and the fact that it removes red tape and streamlines processes for health providers and private health insurance. However, we put it on the record that the data clearly shows this government is weakening Australia's access to affordable health care, not strengthening it.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Payment Times Reporting Amendment Bill 2024</title>
          <page.no>5</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="r7196" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Payment Times Reporting Amendment Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>5</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LEY</name>
    <name.id>00AMN</name.id>
    <electorate>Farrer</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak today as the shadow minister for small and family business on behalf of the coalition. I rise to speak to the bill currently before the House, namely, the Payment Times Reporting Amendment Bill 2024. This bill represents a step towards addressing the chronic issue of late payments to small businesses by large corporations.</para>
<para>As someone who, like many on the side of the House, has run a family business—in my case, a farm—I'm acutely aware of the cash flow challenges faced by our small-business sector. Yes, we know from all the data, and the surveys and the news in the press that times are really tough for our small businesses, but above all that we hear it in the voices of so many small-business owners that we speak with in our communities each and every day. It would be of no surprise to anyone in this House that cash flow is, more than ever, a matter of survival for our small businesses. If cash is king, cash flow is a kingmaker. The coalition, therefore, welcomes any measure that ultimately intends to alleviate the cashflow pressures on Australian small and family businesses.</para>
<para>The Payment Times Reporting Act 2020, which the bill seeks to amend, was a significant piece of legislation. By mandating that businesses with revenues exceeding $100 million report their payment times, the act has ensured that a light is shone on those big businesses that delay payments, often to the detriment of small-business suppliers and further down the contractual chain as well. It was the former coalition government that acknowledged that there is a difference in the resources and expertise available to large corporations compared to that which is available to a small business.</para>
<para>There will always be power imbalances that exist in the commercial world. It should, however, never be the case that the government of the day is empowered to pass judgements of commercial equity. No-one should have to go near the Treasurer's foot with a measuring tape. There exist, however, differences between the capacity and viability of small businesses seeking to assert their contractual rights compared with large corporations that seek the same. The former coalition government listened to Australian small businesses desperate to see an improvement in payment times from large businesses, and established a ledger of its own—namely the Payment Times Reporting Scheme which operates today. This bill, informed by the statutory review and commissioned by the current government, introduces several amendments aimed at improving the operation and effectiveness of the Payment Times Reporting Scheme.</para>
<para>The coalition is pleased to see that the bill contains a streamlining of reporting obligations and aims to reduce the regulatory burden experienced by reporting entities. Simplifying the compliance processes while maintaining the integrity of the data collected is a pragmatic approach that will benefit all parties to commercial dealings present and prospective. The coalition considers it right also that government agencies will be captured by the scheme. Government agencies should be a model payer of Australian small businesses. The provision allowing for consolidated reporting in accordance with Australian accounting standards is a sensible move. This will improve the quality, completeness and comparability of the data reported, making the register a more effective tool for monitoring and addressing payment practices, especially where it reaches outside our borders.</para>
<para>We must remain vigilant, however, about the potential unintended consequences of the additional regulations and ministerial powers contained within this bill. Ministerial discretion, when complemented by ministerial responsibility, is not a bad thing. The coalition maintains some reservations, however, as to the provisions contained within this bill whereby ministerial responsibility can be avoided in the same instance where the ministerial discretion exists. It is critical that we balance the need for regulation with the need to maintain a dynamic and competitive marketplace for Australian businesses small and large.</para>
<para>The coalition will support the Payment Times Reporting Amendment Bill 2024. However, we will seek to work with all parties in the Senate to propose sensible amendments which better align the commercial incentives that operate within the bill with the amended objects of the act.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Education Services for Overseas Students Amendment (Quality and Integrity) 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="r7191" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Education Services for Overseas Students Amendment (Quality and Integrity) Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>6</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FLETCHER</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
    <electorate>Bradfield</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Education Services for Overseas Students Amendment (Quality and Integrity) Bill 2024. This bill amends the Education Services for Overseas Students Act 2000 to make changes which the government says will improve the quality and integrity of the international student sector. It is important Australians are not misled by the primary purpose of the bill. The government's real agenda is to attempt to fix the immigration mess it has created after taking decisions to drastically increase the migration intake, putting further strain on housing, infrastructure and essential services in Australia. In my contribution to this second reading debate, I want to outline the key elements of this bill and its central flaws.</para>
<para>The government's mismanagement of Australia's immigration system has led to the number of international students in Australia more than doubling, from 336,845 in March 2022 to a peak of 713,144 in February 2024. Under Labor there are 80,000 student visa holders who are on their third student visa or more. Some are on an eighth, ninth or 10th student visa. There's a backdoor way to stay in Australia to work. The government's failure to manage Australia's international education sector with the requisite certainty and fairness is causing economic harm to Australian universities, private higher education providers, English-language course providers and the vocational education and training sector. So we should not be fooled by the government's divisive and offensive false narrative that the meteoric growth in international student numbers on its watch has been driven by the so-called shonks and crooks as the Minister for Education, the member for Blaxland, contended in his second reading speech on the bill. While the coalition acknowledges that this bill contains some integrity measures, the government's amendments to the Education Services for Overseas Students Act are primarily concerned with the imposition of a cap on the number of foreigners who can study in Australia. This is an immigration mess entirely of this government's own making.</para>
<para>The bill before the House introduces new ministerial powers for the Minister for Education to set caps on the number of international students who can study in Australia at any one time—not just for each educational institution but for each campus location and course. It is proposed that the methodology for the minister's decision would be set out in a legislative instrument to be tabled in parliament by 31 December 2024, supposedly after consultation with stakeholders. The sector will be required to put in place new caps from 1 January 2025, leaving them with potentially only one day's notice to implement the scheme. This ludicrous timeline lays bare the rushed nature of this legislation and the government's panic. Given the lack of consultation to date and the manner in which the higher education sector has been blindsided by this proposal, it is no wonder that higher education providers are concerned about what lies ahead.</para>
<para>In 2022-23, the international student market generated $36.4 billion in revenue, Australia's fourth largest export. The minister in his second reading speech spoke enthusiastically about this industry, saying:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… it doesn't just make us money.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">It also makes us friends.</para></quote>
<para>I asked the minister: where are those friends? This sector is already reeling from erratic shifts in policy that demonstrate that, when it comes to the management of immigration, the government is all at sea.</para>
<para>After opening the floodgates to international students, the government then covertly implemented policies which discriminated against regional and smaller universities, as well as private higher education and vocational education and training, or VET, providers, by targeting the processing of student visa applications from these institutions. On 22 April, in an article entitled 'Unis ban Indian student applications as visa rejections hit record high', the <inline font-style="italic">Sydney </inline><inline font-style="italic">Morning Herald</inline> reported:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Universities are blocking applications from students from entire countries as the federal government's latest stage in its migration crackdown makes it even tougher for some institutions to recruit foreign pupils.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Some universities, including at least one prestigious Group of Eight institution, have taken the drastic step of banning or limiting applications from countries deemed at high risk of visa refusal, including India and Nepal.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Vice chancellors from smaller universities say the processing of visas has been highly unpredictable and has targeted them unfairly.</para></quote>
<para>This flies in the face of the Prime Minister's joint commitment with Prime Minister Modi of India, made at the first Australia-India annual summit, in March 2023, that 'the efficient and timely processing of student visa applications for Indian nationals' would be facilitated.</para>
<para>This bill also reflects the lack of confidence the government has in the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs and the Minister for Home Affairs, because it gives the power to determine the number of international students who can study in Australia not to those ministers but to the Minister for Education. He merely is required to consult with the Minister for Skills and Training. On one level, it seems very odd indeed to give this power to the Minister for Education and not the minister for immigration, but perhaps the rationale is the disastrous track record of the minister for immigration, with dangerous criminals released onto the streets and the overturning of dozens of visa cancellations of foreign criminals as a result of the minister for immigration having issued direction 99. There is also no clarity as to how the minister's determination on the capping of foreign students will be implemented as a practical measure by the Department of Home Affairs given it has responsibility for the issuing of student visas.</para>
<para>As was made clear in the Leader of the Opposition's budget-in-reply speech, the coalition is concerned about the large influx of international students into our major universities in recent years. At the University of Sydney, for instance, almost half of all students enrolled in semester 1 this year are international students—some 32,800 students. Last year, the university's revenue windfall from international students was $1.46 billion, and the university has made $8 billion from international students since 2017.</para>
<para>Universities operate not just in accordance with legislation and regulations but with a social licence: the trust and confidence that stakeholders and the broader community place in our higher education institutions. A social licence to operate, including in relation to the education of international students is earned through responsible behaviour, transparency and accountability. The social licence to bring in very high numbers of international students to study in Australia is, rightly, brought into question when universities fail to look after the interests of both domestic and international students.</para>
<para>The coalition has been raising these concerns over many months. In a speech to the Australian Technology Network of Universities in July 2023, the shadow minister for education, Senator Henderson, said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Certainly, if universities are going to continue to sell the dream of an Australian education to international students, the sector must take greater responsibility to ensure students don't end up couch surfing just to make ends meet. … Labor's Big Australia policy also has big consequences for domestic students who need access to affordable housing and strong job prospects to thrive and succeed.</para></quote>
<para>The bill before the House today redefines an 'education agent', it inserts a new definition of 'education agent commission' and it strengthens the fit-and-proper test for providers engaging with education agents. Providers will also be required to disclose information on commissions paid upon request by the Secretary of the Department of Education. This will be used to ensure regulation of the sector and to deter operators who may be attempting to subvert Australia's migration system and to exploit students. Education agents operate both overseas and in Australia to sell the dream of an Australian education. They also facilitate the domestic transfer to other providers for students seeking to transfer to another course. In 2023, there were around 5,800 education agencies and more than 23,000 individual education agents facilitating overseas student enrolments with Australian education providers, reflecting the sheer size of this market.</para>
<para>The 2022 Quality Indicators for Learning and Teaching survey reported that around 86 per cent of international students who study in Australia use an education agent to facilitate their enrolment. Providers, typically, pay a commission to these agents per student; the exact amount is not disclosed but it's often up to 15 per cent of their first year of tuition fees. That's around $7,500 per student recruited. Ensuring the integrity of these operations is imperative to protect our largest services export and the international students who choose to study here.</para>
<para>While supportive of increased integrity measures, stakeholders have raised a range of concerns about these amendments. Part 3 of the bill provides the Minister for Education with the power to limit the registration of new providers or the registration of new courses by existing providers, including by pausing registrations for a period of up to 12 months. While the explanatory memorandum states that the minister will 'only exercise this power in limited circumstances', the sector does not share this confidence. Naturally, course details and content can change over time. Currently, if there are material changes in a course then providers need to go through reregistration and approval processes. Limits put in place by the minister for periods of up to 12 months will have significant impacts a provider's ability to meet expected standards and to keep course material current. The CEO of English Australia, Mr Ian Aird, said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… giving the Minister the power to take whole course types off CRICOS—</para></quote>
<para>an acronym for the Commonwealth Register of Institutions and Courses for Overseas Students—</para>
<quote><para class="block">because of integrity concerns about a number of providers offering them, appears to mean that good providers will be punished because government hasn't equipped a regulator capable of ensuring providers abide by the rules.</para></quote>
<para>Part 4 of the bill will require providers to deliver courses to only domestic students for two consecutive years before being able to apply for registration to deliver courses to international students. We note the sensible exemption for ELICOS and foundation course providers. An exemption for table A providers has also been included. Stakeholders and education experts have rightly raised their eyebrows at this.</para>
<para>Part 5 of the bill will institute automatic cancellation of a provider's registration where a course has not been delivered to an overseas student for a period of 12 months. On the surface, this appears sensible, and the government has advised that there are exemptions available where a genuine reason is provided.</para>
<para>Part 6 of the bill will enable automatic suspension of a provider's registration where TEQSA, ASQA or a state authority determines the provider does not meet the fit-and-proper test or where a provider is under investigation. We note concerns raised about the drafting of this provision, including by the CEO of Universities Australia, Luke Sheehy, who said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">A concerning aspect of the legislation, as drafted, is that it would give the Minister power to suspend providers who exceed their cap for a year. This level of overreach is appalling and contrary to risk-based and proportionate regulation …</para></quote>
<para>Let me make some concluding remarks. I want to be clear that, while the coalition will support sensible and constructive improvements to the quality and integrity of the education offered to international students, we are disappointed about the minister's false narrative characterising this bill as a response to the so-called shonks and crooks in the sector. If there has been such widespread unscrupulous activity within the sector, why has there been so little action? After two years, the Minister for Home Affairs has only issued letters to 34 providers just a few weeks ago. No provider has been shut down or fined. Ghost colleges, which provide a backdoor to foreigners to come to Australia and work, should be weeded out. We await the outcome of this investigation. Nonetheless, given that there are more than 1,400 private higher education and VET providers, many of which are doing a first-class job to service international students, the minister's approach in tarnishing this sector as a whole is most regrettable.</para>
<para>The government's Universities Accord process promised so much to the higher education sector, but, after two years, apart from endorsing coalition proposals, such as an independent student ombudsman, we have seen very little by way of meaningful reform. We have seen lots of promises but very little delivery. There have been plenty of disappointing developments, including the axing of research funding for the regions, the nonsensical Startup Year loan scheme and the overturning of the job-ready graduates scheme, which threatens to raise the cost of nursing and teaching degrees. Nor as yet have we seen Labor bring forward legislation to implement its promise to lower student debt indexation. The minister announced that sky-high HELP indexation rates, driven by Labor's high inflation, would be lowered from 7.1 per cent to 3.2 per cent last year and from 4.7 per cent to four per cent this year, but where is the bill to give effect to these changes? When will the refunds promised to three million Australians be delivered?</para>
<para>As for the bill before the House today, there are considerable issues raised by it, reflecting some serious failings of the Albanese government. These failings are noted in the second reading amendment in my name, which I now move:</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 notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) the Government has taken decisions to drastically increase the migration intake putting further strain on housing, infrastructure and essential services in Australia;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) the Government's mismanagement of Australia's immigration system has led to more than double the number of international students in Australia from 336,845 in March 2022 to 713,144 as at February 2024;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) under Labor there are 80,000 student visa holders who are on to their third student visa or more. Some are on an eighth, ninth or tenth student visa, as a backdoor way to stay in Australia to work;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) the Government's failure to manage Australia's international education sector is causing economic harm to Australian universities, private higher education providers, English language course providers and the vocational education sector;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) the bill reflects the lack of confidence the Government has in the Minister for Immigration and Minister for Home Affairs by giving the power to determine the number of international students who can study in Australia to the Minister for Education;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) calls on the Government to rebalance Australia's migration program and manage its impacts on housing, congestion and essential services; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(7) given its deficiencies, the bill has been referred to the Senate Education and Employment Legislation Committee for inquiry to report by 15 August 2024".</para></quote>
<para>I conclude by indicating that the opposition welcomes the opportunity to examine this bill in detail during the Senate inquiry, which is underway and will report on 15 August. We will have more to say following that process.</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 Hogan</name>
    <name.id>218019</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Nature Positive (Environment Protection Australia) Bill 2024, Nature Positive (Environment Information Australia) Bill 2024, Nature Positive (Environment Law Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2024</title>
          <page.no>9</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <p>
              <a href="r7192" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Nature Positive (Environment Protection Australia) Bill 2024</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <a href="r7193" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Nature Positive (Environment Information Australia) Bill 2024</span>
                </p>
              </a>
            </p>
            <a href="r7195" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Nature Positive (Environment Law Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>9</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TED O'BRIEN</name>
    <name.id>138932</name.id>
    <electorate>Fairfax</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to speak on the Nature Positive (Environment Protection Australia) Bill 2024 and the associated bills. This series of cobbled-together, half-baked bills is what we've come to expect from this Labor government—a government which promised the world from opposition but has failed to deliver time and time again since coming to government.</para>
<para>Before I dive into the serious concerns the coalition has about these bills, I think it's important to understand the context in which they are being introduced. According to Labor, these nature-positive bills represent part of the government's plan to fix the broken Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act—otherwise referred to by its acronym, the EPBCA. Business groups and conservationists alike have been waiting for the EPBCA to be fixed for a long, long time. The government's so-called plan was meant to deliver a comprehensive overhaul of national environmental laws, chiefly in response to the Samuel review of the EPBCA—the Samuel review being the statutory review of the operation of the EPBCA that was instigated during the final term of the Morrison government and completed in late 2020. Yet, instead of the substantive overhaul and reform of the EPBCA that Labor had promised, the government has now decided to introduce an expensive and unnecessary new layer of bureaucracy to paper over its failures.</para>
<para>In his final report, Professor Samuel said the findings of his review should all be delivered by 2022. But the Albanese government have arrogantly, or maybe lazily, decided to give themselves another year to complete the work. But they couldn't even meet that extended deadline. Humiliatingly, today they still can't even nominate a date by which they'll get the job done. No-one knows when they will deliver the overhaul resulting from the Samuel review. It's one of the great mysteries of life.</para>
<para>In bringing these bills to parliament, the environment minister has bizarrely claimed that their introduction represents the second phase in a supposedly carefully crafted three-stage process. It's laughable. There never was a three-stage process. That phrase only began to pass the government's lips starting on 16 April this year, as a means to rationalise their cynical decision to rush these three bills before the House today through this chamber. The minister has astoundingly cited the passage of legislation in December last year to establish a nature repair market and to make changes to the water trigger as the supposed first phase of her work. Yet the only reason such changes were legislated at that time was they were part of a hastily negotiated deal with the Greens.</para>
<para>The minister also said in her 16 April announcement that, by now staggering her changes, she was following Professor Samuel's recommended staged approach to environmental law reform. Seriously? What she did not mention was that her approach is completely different from the one outlined by Samuel. Professor Samuel said that the elements of the first tranche of changes should be the immediate creation of legally enforceable national environmental standards, the start of work on complex enabling reform and the delivery of Indigenous-specific reforms, none of which has yet occurred—none. The government have seemingly ignored Samuel's advice but now seek to associate themselves with it. Talk about making it up as you go along!</para>
<para>It is also worth noting that Professor Samuel did not propose that an EPA be established at all. Clearly, the government's course of action is only being taken now so that they can frantically say they've ticked off one of their environmental portfolio commitments.</para>
<para>The three pieces of legislation we are now debating are bills the government are bringing to the parliament at the wrong time and in the wrong order. This is a desperate and vain attempt to signal to the community that they are trying to reset Australia's environmental laws. Clearly, they thought that, by introducing this legislation, it might give at least the appearance of some action. It may win back some of the many stakeholders and broader members of the Australian public who have been so disappointed with this government over the past two years. However, as usual, they have failed miserably. As Tom McIlroy very accurately observed in the <inline font-style="italic">Australian Financial Review</inline> on 29 May, these laws are 'friendless' from start to finish. But we actually don't know when it's going to finish, though, do we?</para>
<para>The minister's handling of what was promised would be a comprehensive revision of national environmental laws has been a story of remarkable incompetence and the minister has left a trail of wreckage in her wake, including through what we now know are dramatic and unprecedented rises in the numbers of threatened animal and plant species, as well as widespread instances of lost economic investment and job creation opportunities. These bills are aimed at putting in place the legislative requirements for the creation of the new environmental protection authority, to be known as Environment Protection Australia, and a data collection body they are calling Environment Information Australia. But, as has been true of so much of the government's Orwellian nature-positive agenda, they reflect overreach and a misreading of what is practically needed.</para>
<para>If the EPA were being set up along the lines Labor had originally nominated, albeit as part of a policy cynically released just one day before the 2022 federal election, then things might actually have been okay, because that would've merely given us a new body that was responsible for delivering better data and better compliance with environmental law as well as improved processes for the proponents of economic developments in Australia. Instead, it has now morphed into something very different and much more concerning, and this from a government that has shown us time and time again that their word is clearly not their bond. Among the new powers of the EPA will be the likely takeover from the minister and department of the authority to undertake many of the environmental assessments of projects under the EPBC Act; extensive new audit and inspection arrangements; the ability, through what are called environment protection orders, to force project proponents to immediately cease work on their developments at any time where it is reasonably suspected that they have contravened their obligations under federal environmental law; the imposition of unprecedented monetary fines of up to $780 million for businesses that are regarded as having caused serious environmental damage; and a significant degree of free rein for and the near complete impunity from removal from office of the EPA's CEO.</para>
<para>Inevitably, each of these changes will be damaging to industry, leaving them with more red tape and confusion to overcome and again increasing sovereign risk and exerting another chilling effect on future investment in Australia. Basically, what the government has done here in introducing the EPA is introduce a cop on the beat to ensure compliance and further bureaucracy for a body of law, the EPBC Act, that the government itself has said is broken. That is effectively what the government is seeking to do by way of these bills. I move, as an amendment:</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) expresses its commitment to making changes to national environmental laws that are genuinely beneficial for both the environment and business;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) notes that this bill does not meaningfully improve Australia's environmental laws, and that they have particular shortcomings in each of the following forms:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the expansion of the EPA's proposed remit well beyond the compliance and data functions promised by the ALP during the 2022 Federal election campaign;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the excessive size, and lack of proportionality, of the new penalties;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the requirement for more regular, earlier reviews of the operation of the EPA than is mandated in this bill;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) the need for clearer limits on the range of circumstances in which environment protection orders can be applied;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) the lack of accompanying information about the full regulatory and financial impacts of the bill, including on cost recovery; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) calls on the Government to finally honour their long-flagged promise to introduce a full package of new National Environmental Standards and an overhauled EPBC Act".</para></quote>
<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 Thompson</name>
    <name.id>281826</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BUSINESS</title>
        <page.no>11</page.no>
        <type>BUSINESS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Rearrangement</title>
          <page.no>11</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:03</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 business intervening before order of the day No. 11, Government business, be postponed until a later hour this day.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>11</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024</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="r7181" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>11</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TINK</name>
    <name.id>300124</name.id>
    <electorate>North Sydney</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>There is a lot of lived experience of and strong opinions about the National Disability Insurance Scheme in my community of North Sydney. Today, as I speak to the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024, I will bring those voices to this place. For many, the introduction of the NDIS was nothing short of a revelation. Its mission—to provide funding to eligible people with disability to enable them to gain more time with family and friends, greater independence, access to new skills, jobs and volunteering, and to improve their quality of life—was something that resonated strongly across my community. The additional fact that the scheme was built on the principles of choice and control and an obligation to meet all reasonable and necessary requests for support was further evidence that this was something my community would embrace.</para>
<para>Yet, 11 years on, with the cost for the scheme blowing out beyond projections and the size and scope of it becoming increasingly unmanageable, there are concerns that it is on the edge of collapse. In reviewing the legislation today, then, my community have been clear that they want me to approach it by identifying what problems the government is seeking to address and scrutinising whether this legislation in its current form will fix those problems without compromising the scheme's fundamental principles.</para>
<para>The government's work to date is welcomed, and I commend the minister for prioritising reform. But I do also believe further consideration is needed to ensure we get it right. Right now, there is a significant Senate inquiry underway into this draft legislation. The inquiry has received over 80 submissions and taken testimony over two days. Due to report on 20 June, which is in just over two weeks time, the committee has sought an extension to ensure more Australians can be heard, but the request has not been granted. The inquiry has produced important outcomes, and this draft legislation should remain open to change given the current inquiry's work. The fact that debate on this bill proceeds here while the Senate inquiry is still unfolding is problematic. I ask the minister to suspend debate on this bill after the second reading phase to allow the inquiry to run its course. By doing so, all of us in this place would then be able to benefit by taking into consideration the recommendations of that committee's final report. The promise of co-design of these reforms was tested by the government's willingness to consider any recommendations from that inquiry as well as amendments suggested by my fellow MPs in this House for they have all fundamentally been informed by people with lived experience.</para>
<para>Assuming the progress of the legislation, however, will not be paused, I want to offer the following observations on both the NDIS and this proposed reform. In reading the explanatory memorandum to this legislation, the government makes the case that reform is required as the NDIS is too expensive, unwieldy, inefficient and causing a great deal of anguish for many participants and their families. There are well over half a million Australians currently registered with the NDIS, the majority of whom are under the age of 14. The scheme provides life-changing services and support to people with permanent disability, but it is being argued that it has lost its way and that we need to get it back to serving its core purpose.</para>
<para>If this is the objective of the legislation, we must ensure we do not lose touch with the reality for people for whom the NDIS was created. Like many others here, my team and I receive requests for help from participants in the NDIS every day back in my electorate of North Sydney. For too many, participation in the scheme is incredibly traumatic, and the anguish and heartache the current NDIS system is causing to many in my community is real. Most requests for help come from people who have made applications to the National Disability Insurance Agency, NDIA, for support and have heard nothing. They wait, unable to make decisions because they aren't sure what support they will have. One person told us: 'I've been told for weeks that I will receive a call back, but no-one is calling me. I don't have an option but to wait.' Another said: 'I made an application for funding for a new wheelchair, but the application was denied. Despite following up with the supporting documents requested, it's been months and I have not heard a thing. I am desperate.' Yet another said: 'I'm waiting to hear back on my son's application for support and it's been six months. We are in desperate need of support so he can continue his schooling. Can you please help me?' The scheme has left thousands of individuals highly distressed and asking me to intervene because they are getting nowhere.</para>
<para>These voices must be at the heart of any reform, and a selective consultation process will just not cut it. The NDIA is undoubtedly backlogged, with people in North Sydney who have been approved by NDIS waiting between three and five months for their planning meetings. While this legislation intends to introduce rules around improved access, it needs to be accompanied by a significant increase in resourcing to clear the backlog. Every individual should be able to maximise their funding to ensure they are receiving the quality of care and support they need. No two people, whether they are living with a disability or not, are the same, and each person's needs will be unique. The recognition of that uniqueness was one of the fundamental underlying principles of the original legislation. To simplify the scheme by categorising people into types may have the appeal of making it easier to manage, but we must acknowledge that that approach will also necessarily overlook individual traits. As a society, then, we must decide whether we are prepared to exact that price.</para>
<para>Overall, the bill seeks to create a framework to improve the scheme for NDIS participants. However, while the ambition is clearly stated, the 'how' of achieving this goal is opaque, as much of the detail of the reforms is not in the main body of legislation; it will exist in delegated legislation. This is no small thing. The government is asking the community to take a leap of faith to welcome this bill without knowing what the delegated legislation will contain. With trust in government at a record low, it's not surprisingly that many are finding that leap difficult. The value of the NDIS to date has been certainty and insurance for participants, and ultimately many feel the lack of detail in this legislation puts that value at risk. We've been assured that major reforms will not happen without consultation with the disability community. But, proposing the largest changes to the NDIS since it started, this bill is of itself major reform, and many feel they have not been heard.</para>
<para>It is extremely worrying that the bill introduces several new powers for the Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme to make rules and determinations that do not need to be passed by the parliament, including determinations in relation to choice and control. Giving this much power to the minister could expose the NDIS to fluctuating political winds. We're at a pivotal moment with legislation, and this legislation has the potential to either restore or undermine the very foundations of the NDIS scheme. Whatever we pass must be able to survive not just the current government but future governments. We need stronger safeguards around accountability and integrity to ensure the future of the scheme. We may accept that the changes that are being driven at this time come from a good place, but the devil in the detail is yet to come. We have seen far too often in this country the havoc that a change in government can wreak on legislation. The current minister is asking the community to trust him, which they may well do. But their questions are not necessarily directed at him; rather, they capture their very real concern: 'What will the next minister or the one after that choose to do with the powers we give them under this new framework?'</para>
<para>At the same time, this legislation turns the principle of reasonable and necessary on its head, replacing that wording with 'NDIS supports', with no detail to explain how an NDIS support will be defined other than that it will be determined by the minister of the day. I therefore join calls from across the sector for the government to release the draft rules for consideration.</para>
<para>Many in my community support the intent of tightening the scope of the NDIS, agreeing that we need to put people with a permanent disability back at the centre of the scheme and guarantee sustainability for future generations. They also believe it will be beneficial to increase the focus on the entry and planning phase to ensure participants start with clear expectations. Where someone's disability is obviously permanent, however, my community urges the government to ensure this legislation does not create unnecessary and emotionally taxing barriers. One father recently said to me: 'My daughter, who has been blind most of her life, is not going to miraculously get her sight back, yet at each reassessment we are required to provide evidence that her condition still exists.' We are told new rules for how functional capacity is tested as well as for how needs assessments will be undertaken will be designed to help address the backlog in applications. From the conversations I've had I know this would make a significant difference to people on the scheme. I also know, however, that if this reform misses the mark I'll be the first to hear about it.</para>
<para>Changes to how plans are set and how funding can be used may be necessary to rein in spending, but I understand this is a challenge for communities to get their heads around because these measures remain vague. I acknowledge it should be a positive thing that this legislation will focus on promoting and ensuring the quality of service. From not being able to access services to being shortcut when they do, the many cases of compromised care are well known by my team, so safeguards to ensure improved quality of services would be welcome. At the same time, I know this is a significant concern to many people, as they fear it will limit their ability to choose who they can turn to to provide the services and supports that are necessary for them.</para>
<para>The concept of empowering individuals to make their own choices and be in control of what services they access, when and how are fundamental principles of the scheme, and we need assurance that they will not be undermined. One case that has impacted me very personally, as a mother, is the contact I've had with a family who have a child with high-level needs. The family have struggled to find the right people to help their child, yet right now they have an incredible group of young people working around their son. The mother pointed out to me recently, though:</para>
<quote><para class="block">As I read it, this new legislation will mean I cannot continue to employ these young people using our NDIS funding because they are not registered carers. They are just great kids, with first aid degrees, who my son has formed a fantastic rapport with. How could an outcome that would see me take those people away from him be in the best interests of my child or my family?</para></quote>
<para>It's frustrating that right now I'm not able to point to something in the legislation that can reassure her. Rather, yet again both she and I are asked to take the minister at his word, and I fear this is simply not enough.</para>
<para>Also of concern is the reform proposed around the provision of foundational supports. Importantly, it must be acknowledged here that a process of decentralisation is not an offload; it is a delegation. We must guarantee individuals and families that they will not experience any diminution of services. Foundational supports provided by states and territories were largely defunded in recent years as participants and service delivery were rolled in under the NDIS. To roll these back to the states and territories is going to take significant attention. While these supports are less intensive and are likely to be delivered through health services, early childhood education and schools, they are still incredibly important, and families have a right to assume the level of service will not be compromised. Without careful design of a broader ecosystem, these huge changes leave room for the reforms to fail. The states are disputing the legislation, arguing that they need clarity on what these reforms are going to mean for them, including what the cost of building them back up will be. Without this clarity, gaps in the system are guaranteed. I call on the government to ensure we maintain responsibility at the federal level to ensure no person or family is left worse off.</para>
<para>In closing, I argue that the success of the new framework will ultimately be reliant on its ability not only to uphold but to champion the human rights of those living with a disability and of their families. Australia ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2008. It exists to promote, protect and ensure the full and equal enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms to all persons with disabilities and to promote respect for their inherent dignity. Ultimately, this bill potentially engages a range of human rights, including the rights of persons with a disability; the rights to an adequate standard of living, health and social security; and the rights of the child. As such, we should tread carefully.</para>
<para>I urge the government to give this bill due scrutiny, including waiting on the report from the Senate inquiry, before progressing any further through this House, and to take the amendments to be moved in this place seriously. A thriving ecosystem of disability supports across Australia must be more comprehensive than what is currently contained in this bill. I ask this government to create a clear road map on how foundational supports are expected to be managed by the states and territories, and I ask them to ensure they never stop listening to the voices that lie at the heart of the delivery of this program.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HILL</name>
    <name.id>86256</name.id>
    <electorate>Bruce</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>There's no doubt that the NDIS, the National Disability Insurance Scheme, has been transformative and has changed life for the better for hundreds of thousands of Australians with a significant and permanent disability, but the truth is also that it's not working for everyone. Too many people have to prove year after year that they are still blind, that they still have the same permanent injury. There's too much red tape, uncertainty, lack of early intervention, and complexity in plans and budget-setting processes. The frank truth is that it's not operating as it was intended: to focus on those Australians with a significant and permanent disability. And so it's important that, through the National Disability Insurance Scheme amendment (getting the NDIS back on track No. 1) Bill 2024 and the reform process, the scheme is returned to its core purpose and that, as the minister has said, it's not the only lifeboat in the ocean.</para>
<para>Reform ideally, for something so significant to the country and to hundreds of thousands of Australians, needs to be bipartisan. It needs to work for people, and the reforms need to stand the test of time. No-one wants to see the NDIS become a never-ending political football. The truth is also that many of these reforms should have happened years ago—especially the action on frauds and shocks. It is not sustainable, morally or politically, that in large parts of the community now, often for people who are not directly connected with the scheme, when you say 'NDIS', people start laughing and think 'rorts and waste'. That's not an acceptable situation. That's not the reality overall for the scheme, but it is endemic in parts of the scheme. The scheme also has to be fiscally sustainable. Frankly, it was not. It's not financially sustainable for the Commonwealth or the country as a whole. Without action, by 2032, over a million Australians would be on the NDIS and it would cost more than $100 billion a year. That's not an effective and efficient use of taxpayer money to provide supports to people with a significant and permanent disability.</para>
<para>We also have to make sure that the scheme is sustainable in terms of community support and confidence, and that the money goes to those for whom the scheme was designed. So I welcome on face value the opposition's statements that they will support the bill through the House. I also note—and I listened carefully to the previous speaker's comments—that detailed negotiations and listening continue. I welcome the government's amendments that the minister has foreshadowed so far to assuage some of the fears and concerns, and I anticipate there'll be more before the bill wends its way through the parliament.</para>
<para>The changes, though, will improve the experience of participants and restore that original intent of the scheme to focus on Australians with a significant and permanent disability. The bill will provide clarity on who can access the NDIS, enable better early intervention pathways for people living with psychosocial disability and children younger than nine years old with developmental delay and disability, and improve how NDIS participant budgets are set, making them more flexible, and provide clearer information on how they will be spent.</para>
<para>Importantly, the bill implements key recommendations of the NDIS review—and I think it's important that we are cognisant of that. I heard the previous speaker suggesting that we should stop, wait and not progress this, and that consultation hadn't occurred and not everyone had been spoken to. With respect, I just don't think that's a fair characterisation of the point we're at and where the bill came from. There was a comprehensive review that engaged more than 10,000 people, considered more than 4,000 submissions and was headed by Bruce Bonyhady and former Commonwealth departmental secretary Lisa Paul. They are real experts—frankly, more expert than, I suspect, anyone in this place. That's actually how good public policy and good public administration should occur—not that we, as parliamentarians, sit there and read 4,000 submissions and talk to 10,000 people. That's frankly ridiculous when you think about the span of responsibilities that the parliament has in every portfolio and every policy domain. It was a properly constituted review. It was a serious piece of work. It engaged seriously and thoughtfully with Australians with a disability and other experts in the redesign of the scheme, and we should give it great weight.</para>
<para>It's appropriate that this bill is the first in a series of anticipated legislative changes that the Australian government will make in response to that properly constituted NDIS review, which was an election commitment of the government.</para>
<para>I see that the next speaker's here, and, in the interests of time, I will wrap up. I've made some of the key points that I wish to make. I really urge all sides of the House to take this seriously to reach a consensus on this, because we can't have the lives of Australians with a disability become a political football. Not every view can be accommodated. This is a seriously good-faith exercise by the government in listening to people with a disability, and I think it will improve the scheme, make it fiscally sustainable and improve the experience for Australians living with disability.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CHANEY</name>
    <name.id>300006</name.id>
    <electorate>Curtin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024 makes some significant changes to the NDIS, which are intended to address its sustainability while still retaining the real benefit we've seen from the transition to the NDIS.</para>
<para>I can understand why people are so concerned about anything that's designed to protect this system's financial sustainability. Because of the huge shift implementing the NDIS over the last 10 years, many people feel like they've been fighting the system and legitimately worry that limiting the scheme's future growth will negatively affect the support they receive. I want to talk about why protecting the sustainability of the NDIS is important, the key concerns I've heard from constituents, how government says it will respond to these concerns and how the government needs to be held to account in implementing this bill.</para>
<para>Firstly, I'll speak on sustainability of the NDIS. The NDIS is probably the most significant piece of reform we've undertaken in the last 15 years. It represented a big shift in approach from a block funded welfare approach to empowering people with disability to have choice and control over the support they receive. Now, 10 years after its inception, it makes sense we're reviewing the scheme. With such a big shift it was always going to take some time to embed the necessary cultural and systemic changes.</para>
<para>Let's make no mistake about it: the NDIS is a good thing. At its core the scheme empowers people with disability to use funds given to them to purchase services that meet their unique needs and reflect their aspirations. But when it was designed 10 years ago the architects of the NDIS could not have imagined the cost blowout we've seen. The NDIS is currently the third-largest program as measured by total general government sector expenses, with an estimated expenditure of $41.9 billion in 2023-24. Nearly 600,000 Australians are NDIS participants, with about 6,000 people joining the scheme every month. It's predicted to cost us $100 billion within a decade. Its costs are growing at a faster rate than any other area of spending except interest on the national debt. It needs to be sustainable. We need to continue to provide effective and fair support to people with disability in our community, and we need to be able to afford it.</para>
<para>In 2022 the government commissioned a review of the NDIS, which was released in December last year. It's worth noting the review's focus was on putting people with disability back at the centre of the NDIS and ensuring the sustainability of the NDIS for future generations. The review made 26 recommendations, including designing support packages based on an assessment of the recipient's functional requirements; more foundational supports provided outside the scheme, including a greater role for states and territories in delivery; extra help for people to navigate the scheme; and improving incentives for providers to deliver quality and value-for-money supports to participants.</para>
<para>It seems obvious to me and my constituent liaison officers that the NDIS is not working effectively or fairly for NDIS clients. NDIS issues are one of the main reasons constituents contact my office for help. We've handled more than 120 personal cases, nearly half of which have been in the last six months. Too many people, as well as coping with significant disabilities, feel like they're battling a system that was meant to be person centred but has turned into a bureaucratic monolith. We hear from people who have trouble accessing the NDIS, experience long delays in getting plans reviewed and cannot speak to a person about their plan. If I had to summarise the common elements of many of the NDIS complaints we have, it's that there's a lack of common sense and a complex and bureaucratic approach to solving problems. Governments are just not very good at building systems that put the person at the centre. It's a noble goal but we have little precedent in government systems for a personalised approach.</para>
<para>In this context I can completely understand why people on the NDIS are scared of changes. When you've been fighting a system that requires you to justify your needs again and again, you don't want to lose what you fought for and it's hard to believe anything designed to save money will work out well for you. We cannot, in the reform of the NDIS, make people worse off. We cannot, in passing this bill, make it harder for people with disability to access support. Progressing with this before the Senate inquiry reports raises some issues. I'd prefer the findings of the Senate inquiry to inform the legislation.</para>
<para>I want to go through some of the main concerns I've heard from my community and how the government has said these concerns will be addressed. I think some of these concerns are adequately addressed. For others I'd like to see some amendments to give people comfort. Other concerns will depend heavily on how the legislation is implemented.</para>
<para>The first concern I've heard is there's a lot of decision-making pushed into delegated legislation. One of the problems with the NDIS has been the rigidity of some aspects, which creates nonsensical situations where basically the computer says no. If issues are addressed in delegated legislation they can be changed if something isn't working. Obviously that benefit can also result in a fear that it can be changed easily for the wrong reasons. But there are some checks and balances put in place to minimise the risks of delegating too much power. The bill contains six ministerial instruments which largely relate to how the agency will operationalise the changes. There are 30 new rule-making powers in the legislation. Of these, 23 are category A rules, which require the universal agreement of all states and territories. Two of the remaining powers require a majority of all states to agree, and the remaining five require consultation with the states.</para>
<para>It seems appropriate that the new rule-making powers require the say of the states, given that the system requires cooperation and buy-in from the states so that people don't fall between the cracks. I'll support an amendment to embed the needs for co-design and consultation in the development of this delegated legislation, and I'll also be reviewing delegated legislation when it's made, consulting with disability organisations and supporting a disallowance if adequate consultation on co-design—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>E0D</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</title>
        <page.no>16</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Tasmania: Roads</title>
          <page.no>16</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PEARCE</name>
    <name.id>282306</name.id>
    <electorate>Braddon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Light-fingered Labor has been caught out again. Last month's federal budget left Tasmania off the map. Whilst Tassie was thrown a few crumbs, they were nowhere near enough to compensate locals for the cost-of-living crisis that has been of their making. A key pledge in this budget was $80 million to upgrade the Lyell Highway in southern Tasmania, but it has been revealed and confirmed that this is not new money. Instead, it has been ripped away from money already promised to provide safety and freight efficiency upgrades to the Bass Highway along the north-west coast.</para>
<para>The Bass Highway between Devonport and Launceston is the busiest B-double truck route in Tasmania. It carries the highest mass of consumer goods of any road in the state. It carries freight in and out of Tasmania through the state's two largest ports: the port of Burnie and the port of Devonport. Anyone driving this section of highway would know the state of the road and the safety issues that so desperately need addressing.</para>
<para>We need more investment in that region, not less, and we certainly don't need a government that steals money away from our region to try to shore up a vulnerable Labor seat in the adjoining electorate. It's theft, and the people of the north-west in the electorate of Braddon want their $80 million back.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Disability Insurance Scheme</title>
          <page.no>16</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELYEA</name>
    <name.id>309484</name.id>
    <electorate>Dunkley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>At the Dunkley office, one of the issues we receive a lot of questions about is the National Disability Insurance Scheme, the NDIS. People are keen to understand the pending changes because, when people hear the word 'change', they are concerned that they are going to have their packages reduced and that they will have less financial support for their individual needs. My team and I have been listening to these stories from Dunkley residents and service providers. We've been listening to these concerns, but we've also been hearing about the shonky organisations that are out there in the community and about the need for the reforms that we are putting into action to ensure the NDIS is meeting the needs of NDIS clients.</para>
<para>I am aware that there are people in the community who are being preyed upon by unscrupulous providers and are unable to advocate for their own needs. To each of the 5,425 people in Dunkley with an NDIS package, I say: the Albanese government has committed $42 billion to the scheme this budget year. This government is working hard to ensure people with a disability are back at the centre of the NDIS, restoring trust in the scheme and ensuring its sustainability for future generations.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Southern Moreton Bay Islands</title>
          <page.no>16</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PIKE</name>
    <name.id>300120</name.id>
    <electorate>Bowman</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The islands of Moreton Bay are one of Australia's hidden gems, but for far too long they've been so well hidden that they have missed out on funding from all levels of government. When the Labor government excluded the islands from eligibility for their Growing Regions Program, I and other community leaders wrote to the infrastructure minister to voice our concern. In her response, the minister mistook uninhabited islands in the member for Fadden's electorate for the Southern Moreton Bay Islands in my electorate. To help educate the minister about our islands, our community sent over 500 postcards to her office to show her exactly where they are.</para>
<para>But, after dismissing the pleas of my community, it has now been revealed that the Labor government has underspent the Growing Regions funds by $93.4 million. One-third of the program's funds have been left unspent, while 400 project applications were turned down. We have so many important projects on the bay islands that could tick every box for Growing Regions funds except for the fact that the minister refuses to recognise them as a regional location. It is absurd that projects in Surfers Paradise or Noosa can claim regional funding while projects on the Southern Moreton Bay Islands, which are considered in the fourth percentile of the SEIFA index of social disadvantage, are unable to access the investment.</para>
<para>I ask minister to reconsider. Come out to the islands with me and see them for yourself. If the minister needs to find a way to spend this $93.4 million shortfall, there are plenty of projects.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Surf Life Saving WA Nipper and Youth Awards</title>
          <page.no>17</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms ROBERTS</name>
    <name.id>157125</name.id>
    <electorate>Pearce</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The annual Surf Life Saving WA Nipper and Youth Awards are a way to recognise and celebrate the outstanding achievements of our nippers and youth members across Western Australia. We have three surf lifesaving clubs in Pearce, with a number of finalists in the awards. I wish to acknowledge and thank them all for their service to our local community.</para>
<para>The Nipper Club Achiever, nominated by their club in recognition of their work in the areas of individual safety, self-awareness and lifesaving, were: Danica Boschin from Alkimos Surf Life Saving Club; Henry Hinson from Quinns Mindarie Surf Life Saving Club; and Sophia Kiernan from Yanchep Surf Life Saving Club. Nominated in the Youth Club Achiever category, in recognition of their achievements and commitment in the areas of lifesaving, training and leadership, were: Ethan Nicholls from Alkimos Surf Life Saving Club; Isobel Fraser from Quinns Mindarie Alkimos Surf Life Saving Club; and Chaz Batarseh from Yanchep Alkimos Surf Life Saving Club. Marcus Nicholls of Alkimos was nominated for the under 14-15 Lifesaver of the Year for displaying outstanding patrol service during the season. The Youth Leaders programs tracks the hours a youth member puts into lifesaving and training, with nominations as follows: Marcus Nicholls and Charlee Greenwood; Tana Wesley and Isobel Fraser; and Jasmine Goeree and Matilda Dall.</para>
<para>These nominations are a clear demonstration of their dedication and commitment, and we congratulate all the wonderful surf lifesavers in our communities. They play such an important role in community safety on the beaches and in the water. Thank you to one and all.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Television Sports Broadcasts</title>
          <page.no>17</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BANDT</name>
    <name.id>M3C</name.id>
    <electorate>Melbourne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Imagine if you had needed a paid subscription to watch Matilda's history-making penalty shootout last year. It's unthinkable, right? It's the 'brick wall' behind a paywall. But under Labor's new media laws that's exactly what could happen. The Tillies have inspired us all and smashed viewership records—42 per cent of the country watched their semifinal. That's more than any AFL or NRL grand final and bigger than Cathy Freeman's iconic 400-metre win. Across their World Cup campaign, millions tuned in digitally, for free, on smart TVs, laptops and phones.</para>
<para>But Labor's outdated proposal doesn't protect free digital streaming for sport, meaning you could need an old-school aerial television to watch the next Women's World Cup, or be forced to pay up. As if that's fair! It shouldn't matter how you watch these big events, they should be free. There were reports from the US that Americans are currently being slugged the equivalent of A$2,000 to watch a full season of football. It's a joke, and we're heading that way if we don't act now. Households can't afford the multiple out-of-pocket streaming services that dominate the field, especially when things are so tough. Our future Tillies, AFL stars and Olympians should be able to watch their sporting idols for free no matter what device they use. This is why the Greens will move to fix Labor's outdated legislation.</para>
<para>Sport belongs to all of us, not to the Murdoch media empire or the pay-to-play streaming services. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Corangamite Electorate: Country Women's Association</title>
          <page.no>17</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COKER</name>
    <name.id>263547</name.id>
    <electorate>Corangamite</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Barwon Heads is so well represented by the local women of the Country Women's Association. These inspirational women are such a breath of fresh air—full of enthusiasm and innovative ideas that are resulting in amazing support for the local community.</para>
<para>Recently, I met with these women to congratulate them on their successful volunteer grant, which is helping in their efforts to raise money for worthy local projects. While many Australians may equate the CWA with famous recipes for scones, the CWA has always done so much more. It has advocated for women's issues at their local, state and federal levels. And I'm proud to say that our government is listening.</para>
<para>Through our recent budget we're investing in paid superannuation on paid parental leave, and expanding paid parental leave to 26 weeks. We're delivering better support for women suffering endometriosis, pelvic pain and miscarriage, we're establishing the Leaving Violence Program and investing a record $3.4 billion to help end family and sexual violence. We're improving wages in feminised workforces, like aged care, and making child care cheaper so that women can return to work if they wish to.</para>
<para>When I spoke to the CWA members about these reforms they were so positive; these are initiatives that matter to them and they matter to all women. When we support women, we not only support their wellbeing but we support families and create a solid foundation for the future.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Legal Assistance Partnership</title>
          <page.no>17</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILKIE</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
    <electorate>Clark</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last week the government finally released the Independent review of the <inline font-style="italic">National Legal Assistance Partnership report</inline>. It included 39 welcome recommendations—most notably for an urgent injection of funding, because it's clear our community legal services are stretched to the limit in trying to meet increasing demand. Indeed, a report published by Community Legal Centres Australia in March found that centres were forced to turn away more than 368,000 people seeking help in 2022-23, averaging a thousand people a day. I've met with the sector and I can attest to the fact that the situation in Tasmania is even more acute than on the mainland. In fact, it's no exaggeration to say Tassie's services really are at breaking point.</para>
<para>The review was handed to the Attorney-General in March, giving the government ample time to consider the recommendations and provide sorely needed funds in the budget. But they didn't, and the sector and the community continue suffer. So, with the National Legal Assistance Partnership set to expire next year, it's vital federal and state governments consider the review's findings, accept the recommendations and establish a much better national agreement to adequately fund and structure legal services. Until this happens, all the government announcements about protecting vulnerable people—including women, children and Indigenous people—is just spin.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Boothby Electorate: Volunteers</title>
          <page.no>18</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MILLER-FROST</name>
    <name.id>296272</name.id>
    <electorate>Boothby</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'd like to congratulate 19 fantastic volunteer-based organisations that have recently been awarded volunteer grants in my electorate of Boothby. Congratulations to: Blackwood Reconciliation Group, who recently hosted over a thousand people for their reconciliation walk; Blackwood and Darlington scout groups; Brighton Church of Christ Community Care; Eden Hills Country Fire Service, an important part of our emergency response; Friends of Urrbrae House; Glenelg North Community Garden; Glenelg Surf Life Saving Club, another volunteer group that literally saves lives; Kenilworth Football Club; National Seniors Australia Brighton branch; the National Trust of South Australia's Watiparinga Reserve; Pasadena and St Marys Action Group, which recently revitalised the Pasadena Community Centre with a huge range of activities; Sustainable Communities SA; Pasadena Tennis Club; Plympton Flyers Little Athletics Club; Rotary Club of Holdfast Bay; Somerton Yacht Club; South Adelaide Basketball Club; Wesley Chapel Club; and the Vietnam Veterans Federation SA branch, which provides services across the state.</para>
<para>Boothby residents volunteer at a higher rate than across South Australia or Australia more broadly. Volunteering is rewarding for the individual—it provides vital services, recreational opportunities, enhances community connections and leads to a vibrant, connected community. Congratulations to all, and don't forget to get your volunteer of the year award nominations in.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Energy Prices</title>
          <page.no>18</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PITT</name>
    <name.id>148150</name.id>
    <electorate>Hinkler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Give me a two, give me a seven, give me a five—put them all together and what have you got? You've got another broken promise from the Albanese government. There's no $275 reduction coming for electricity prices—none at all. In today's <inline font-style="italic">Australian</inline> there were a couple of columns about it—one by Judith Sloan. The true cost of renewables has long been hidden in the small print—yes it has. No-one in their right mind thinks it's going well—that's correct. Let's not forget about the trampling of property rights—absolutely, particularly in regional areas. But a really important one is the loss of ancillary services associated with the uptake of renewable generation, voltage and frequency control, and system strength. These actually matter; there are inherent in traditional generators, they haven't been costed, they have to be replaced, they have to be installed and they have to be paid for, and they are not included in the costs by those opposite. Who is going to pay for it? It is the electricity users. What is coming? It is the reality train, the blackout train. The reality train is not on the horizon; it's right here.</para>
<para>Speaking of blackouts, in the same paper today—the <inline font-style="italic">Australian</inline>—on the same page and in the same location, is Minister Bowen railing about nuclear energy in Germany, the dead horse. The minister forgets there are interconnectors to nuclear energy in France. Saudi Arabia—there's no nuclear power there, just distant whispers. The reality is that Saudi Arabia has an oil-and-gas industry and, guess what? They use gas—lots of it. They generate electricity at under $10 a megawatt hour. Imagine what we could do in Australia if only we could match it.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Wages</title>
          <page.no>18</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PAYNE</name>
    <name.id>144732</name.id>
    <electorate>Canberra</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Yesterday we saw some great news out of the Fair Work Commission. The commission backed the government's call for a pay rise for Australian workers—2.6 million workers on the minimum wage will see a 3.75 per cent increase to their award wages. With inflation expected to be below three per cent in the second half of the year, this represents a real wage rise for these workers. Make no mistake, this is a decision which comes as a direct result of the Albanese Labor government backing working Australians.</para>
<para>Unfortunately, not everyone in this chamber wants the lowest-paid Australians to get a pay rise. From the response of those opposite to the commission's decision yesterday, you'd think the sky was falling in. Shadow Finance minister Senator Hume said, 'This is bad news for Australians.' They really haven't changed their spots, have they? They still believe in keeping wages low as a deliberate design feature of the economy. Well, this government is different. We back Australian workers. As a result of yesterday's decision, those workers will earn more. In just under a month's time, those workers—every single one of them—will be keeping more of what they earn as well, with our bigger and better tax cuts. That's what you get when you elect a Labor government, because we want Australians to earn more and keep more of what they earn.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Durack Electorate: Volunteer Grants</title>
          <page.no>19</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PRICE</name>
    <name.id>249308</name.id>
    <electorate>Durack</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It gives me great pleasure to talk about some of the wonderful volunteer organisations in the seat of Durack. I recently announced the very worthy Durack recipients of the 2023-24 volunteer grants, with each group receiving up to $5,000 each. These grants are designed to support our volunteer groups to keep making a difference in their community. This year's Durack volunteer grant round had a focus on supporting local youth and encouraging the younger generation to help out within their communities.</para>
<para>Chittering Wildlife Carers, a wonderful not-for-profit in the south of my electorate, treats and cares for sick and injured native wildlife, with the aim being to rehabilitate animals back into their natural environment. They will utilise the funds to purchase essential joey formula and to train youth carers. Another worthy recipient is the Newman Gymnastics Club in the Pilbara, who can now provide safer equipment for their coaches and athletes. I'd like to shout out to Peta Baer, who runs the Newman Gymnastics Club and is an emerging East Pilbara leader. Well done, Peta. Also, Kununurra Neighbourhood House will be equipped with a new washing machine, iPad and modified trailer, and the awesome Bicycles for Humanity in Geraldton will purchase new parts and tools to continue their vital work of restoring old bikes and donating them to children in need.</para>
<para>On behalf of the entire electorate, I want to extend my gratitude to all of our volunteers for their remarkable contributions. Your commitment to serving others exemplifies the true essence of community spirit. You truly are the heart and soul of our Durack community.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Wages, Taxation</title>
          <page.no>19</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURNELL</name>
    <name.id>300129</name.id>
    <electorate>Spence</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Now that we are more than a full 24 hours after the Fair Work Commission handed down its annual wage review, like each successive annual wage review under the Albanese Labor government, it saw wages for 2.6 million Australians go up yet again. Every one of those 2.6 million workers knows that they have a government standing in their corner. Many of those workers hail from my electorate of Spence. Because of yesterday's decision, some of Australia's lowest paid workers will be receiving an extra $33 per week or an extra $1,700 every year. Across the past three wage reviews under our government, that same worker will have seen an increase in their pay of $143.30 per week or nearly $7,500 per year. Low wage growth wasn't just a bug in the system of those opposite's time in government; it was a design feature. Many of Australia's lowest paid workers will remember the former member for Cook fighting against the raising of the minimum wage up until the very end of ridiculing the Prime Minister for daring to commit to intervene in the upcoming wage review after the election. We won, and we did.</para>
<para>Workers hearing yesterday's news will also know that they will be receiving an even bigger tax cut come 1 July. That's because they elected a government that wants Australian workers to earn more and keep more of what they earn.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>South Australia: Black Summer Bushfires, Edithburgh Sports and Community Club</title>
          <page.no>19</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RAMSEY</name>
    <name.id>HWS</name.id>
    <electorate>Grey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>2019-20 is seen now as the Black Summer fires. The majority of the fires—the worst, of course—were centred in New South Wales, but we had our problems in South Australia as well. The largest fire was at Kangaroo Island. It burnt about 211,000 hectares and 56 houses. I actually went over there for a couple of days to give a mate a bit of a hand cleaning up. On Yorke Peninsula, too, we lost 5,000 hectares on 20 November in 2019, and 16 properties were damaged.</para>
<para>As a result of the fires, the Edithburgh Sports and Community Club applied for the Morrison Black Summer grant and secured $1.81 million to convert their oval into an emergency management centre. On the weekend, I was privileged to give a hand in opening up their new toilets and change rooms, male and female—the first time we've seen female change rooms at that oval. It will, of course, double as football and netball change rooms as well. There are lights on the oval. Well done to Terry Austin and his team. I'll just point out that they had a pony pooping contest towards the end, where they fenced off a bit of the oval and divided it up into squares, and then the prize went to the one who picked the right square. I'm not sure what the prize was. Perhaps it was—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Member for Aston.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation</title>
          <page.no>19</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms DOYLE</name>
    <name.id>299962</name.id>
    <electorate>Aston</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Everyone who pays tax in Aston will receive a tax cut on 1 July, and award workers in Aston now know that, on the same date, they will also get a pay rise. It's a 3.75 per cent increase, which will help working people keep ahead of inflation. This is because the Albanese Labor government is committed to helping working people and delivering real cost-of-living relief. Labor's tax cuts mean greater tax relief for low- and middle-income taxpayers, who are disproportionately women. That's retail workers, hospitality workers, factory workers—so many of the essential workers that we celebrated not so long ago.</para>
<para>For full-time workers, the combination of the pay rise and tax cuts means that retail workers will get $102 a week extra, minimum wage workers will get $120 a week extra, and aged-care workers, because of the work our government has done in supporting a pay rise for them, will get $200 a week extra in their bank accounts. With an average tax cut of just over $1,500, plus the 3.75 per cent increase in pay, award workers and taxpayers in Aston will earn more and keep more of what they earn. My office has received many emails and phone calls from constituents who were wrapped that we have made these changes to ensure our tax system is fairer for working people. I encourage all my hardworking constituents in Aston to see how much they will be saving by using the tax cut calculator on the Treasury website.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Sturt Electorate: Australia Post</title>
          <page.no>20</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr STEVENS</name>
    <name.id>176304</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I take this opportunity to raise the deep concerns in my electorate about the closure of Australia Post post offices. In particular, recently we have been informed that the Campbelltown Post Office is closing. There is a lot of curiosity about the way in which that was announced. The way the community was informed, via correspondence from Australia Post, led us to believe it was to do with the landlord not being prepared to renew the lease on that post office. But that turns out not to be quite correct. The landlord was very happy to have the lease continue on, but Australia Post indicated they only wanted to enter into some kind of temporary, month-by-month arrangement, and so the landlord, quite reasonably, wasn't prepared to accept those terms.</para>
<para>What that indicates to me is that Australia Post were always intending to close the Campbelltown Post Office and weren't therefore prepared to lock into a long-term lease. If that's the case, they should come clean with my community and explain that decision, not pretend that it was some issue of negotiation with the landlord. The Campbelltown Post Office is vitally important to the people of Campbelltown. Campbelltown is a significant suburb. The local council is named after that suburb, and the suggestion that they won't have their local post office is a real blow to the community. There is a secret agenda here to shut post offices without properly explaining why, and Australia Post should come clean on it.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Greens</title>
          <page.no>20</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr ANANDA-RAJAH</name>
    <name.id>290544</name.id>
    <electorate>Higgins</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I sat in this chamber when the leader of the Greens political party, who is present today, accused Labor MPs of being complicit in genocide. Within hours, an online campaign was launched calling for a 'national day of action against Labor MPs complicit in genocide'. Those were the exact words. The next day, offices were vandalised and rendered unusable. Staff were scared. Scarce resources like police, the AFP, cleaners and tradies were diverted. The words spoken in this chamber ricochet around this country, tearing at our social fabric, and the gun gets fired here. The Greens, with their signals, whip up hordes in masks and keffiyehs, armed with their weapon of choice, self-righteousness, because it is the perfect justification for anything, even incitement to violence.</para>
<para>Resist the impulse to pull the trigger, because it's less like firing a gun and more like detonating a bomb. The fallout goes far and wide—for Jewish Australians, Arab Australians and ordinary Australians, as well as businesses supporting Aussie jobs. Don't pretend that this is about the war. This is squarely about weaponising a devastating conflict for political gain. The Libs dog whistle on migrants and the Greens incite violence, while this Labor government is trying to hold this country together. Yes, people are frustrated and distressed with this conflict, including our government. But the Greens should try and disagree respectfully, because your failure to do so is whipping up social unrest.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Housing</title>
          <page.no>20</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SUKKAR</name>
    <name.id>242515</name.id>
    <electorate>Deakin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We have yet more problems with the government's ill-conceived and troubled Housing Australia Future Fund. We already know that the Prime Minister's pledge to build 40,000 affordable homes through that fund has yet to deliver one home in two years of this government. Even more cracks are showing in the foundations of this ill-conceived money-go-round.</para>
<para>We've got new revelations today that only a handful of builders Australia-wide can even participate in this particular program. One of the HAF rule requirements mandates that any successful proponent has to hold a specific FSC accreditation to work on any project funded by the HAF. This is particularly an issue for the housing minister in her own home state of Tasmania, where there are next to no FSC accredited builders. Absolutely no builders in Tasmania can participate in this fund.</para>
<para>This fund obviously has fundamental issues when you consider that after two years of the Albanese government, not even one home has been built. Now, when there is a possibility that a little bit of money will trickle out, there are absolutely no builders in Tasmania and few builders around the country that could even participate to build any.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Liberal Party of Australia, Albanese Labor Government</title>
          <page.no>21</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RAE</name>
    <name.id>300122</name.id>
    <electorate>Hawke</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Liberal Party have come up with a solution, and I'm not talking about nuclear. This is a solution that is much less fissionable. Their solution is Josh Frydenberg. I'm left wondering that if Josh Frydenberg is the answer, then what on earth was the question in the first place? This is a bloke who spent COVID having pyjama parties at Scott Morrison's house while workers lost their jobs and corporations were paid billions of dollars in taxpayer handouts. I'm not sure what the two of them were doing over there at the Lodge, but, taking a look at them, I'm pretty sure it wasn't each other's hair. I think I know why the Liberals need the former Treasurer to return.</para>
<para>Under the Albanese Labor government, real wages are finally moving upwards again. Just this week, the Fair Work Commission announced an increase to the full-time minimum wage of over $1,700 and next month every Australian taxpayer will receive a tax cut. This is after a decade of Josh and the Liberals deliberately keeping Australian wages low. Thankfully, Josh has read the tea-leaves—and perhaps the polling that he privately commissioned as well—and he's decided not to run, at least not this particular time.</para>
<para>Labor wants Australian workers to earn more and keep more of what they earn. The Liberals' best game is to recycle the member for Kooyong as second scraps to attack Australian workers and Australian conditions and to suppress the wage growth in our economy.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Energy</title>
          <page.no>21</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TED O'BRIEN</name>
    <name.id>138932</name.id>
    <electorate>Fairfax</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>You may have noticed over the last few weeks that the Minister for Climate Change and Energy has been very active in the media, calling—in a very undignified and desperate way—for the coalition to release its energy policy. Why would the minister be so keen to try to focus on the coalition right now, do you think? I suspect it's because of his own performance.</para>
<para>Let's look at the last few weeks. We heard from the regulator that Labor's promise of a $275 reduction in household power bills is now dead. Some households will pay up to $1,000 more next year than what they were promised by Labor. We also heard that we might be facing blackouts as early as this summer. We've heard that from the operator. No wonder the minister doesn't want to talk about that. The minister also doesn't want to talk about the fact that Australia's emissions are now going up and not going down. The minister doesn't want to talk about that.</para>
<para>We heard today from another report that the transmission projects the minister spruiks are running years behind schedule. The point is that this minister is failing on every single point—on affordability, on reliability and on emissions. No wonder he doesn't want to talk about his own record, but his record is pathetic.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Budget</title>
          <page.no>21</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LAXALE</name>
    <name.id>299174</name.id>
    <electorate>Bennelong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Labor's latest budget has once again made clear the choice between Labor and the Liberals. Labor knows that Australians are facing cost-of-living pressures, and in budget after budget we've had measures to help. This year's budget is no different.</para>
<para>Labor will reduce the cost of health care, with an extra 29 fully bulk-billed Medicare urgent care clinics. Labor has taken further steps to make medicines cheaper by freezing out-of-pocket costs, Labor has increased rent assistance by a further 10 per cent and Labor has delivered an extra $6 billion for housing supply. In addition, every household will get $300 in energy relief and every single taxpayer will get a tax cut. That's a tax cut for everyone, not just some.</para>
<para>Let's contrast our plan with that of the Liberals and Nationals. How many measures did the Liberals announce to help families with the cost of living? None. What policies did the Liberals announce to reduce the cost of medicines? None. What is their great plan to create better jobs with higher wages? There isn't one. The only policies they announced on housing were to let young people wipe out their super and, of course, to shamefully blame migrants for every problem under the sun.</para>
<para>While they continue their politics of negativity and division, Labor is getting on with the job. This year, we've delivered broad cost-of-living relief and another surplus budget because we want people to earn more and keep more of what they earn.</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>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</title>
        <page.no>22</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Visa Refusal or Cancellation</title>
          <page.no>22</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
    <electorate>Wannon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs. In a leaked video reported in the <inline font-style="italic">Australian</inline> just before question time, the minister sensationally claimed that Australia has an 'obligation' to foreign criminals. Minister, what is Australia's obligation to foreign criminals?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GILES</name>
    <name.id>243609</name.id>
    <electorate>Scullin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the co-chair of the parliamentary friends of refugees for his question! I'm pleased to advise the House that a short time ago I spoke with New Zealand Deputy Prime Minister Peters.</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The minister will pause. I can't hear a word the minister is saying, so we're just going to reset—not the clock, but reset—for the minister to continue on.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GILES</name>
    <name.id>243609</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>A short time ago I spoke with New Zealand Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters. I spoke to him about the changes our government will soon be making to strengthen community safety in Australia. I conveyed to him that direction 99 has not been working as intended and that we will be revoking ministerial direction 99 and issuing a new, revised direction to make sure that the protection of the Australian community outweighs all other considerations.</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! Members on my left will cease interjecting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Resources Sector</title>
          <page.no>22</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LAWRENCE</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
    <electorate>Hasluck</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Resources. How will the Albanese Labor government's investment into the resources sector deliver a future made in Australia? Are there any barriers to that agenda?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MADELEINE KING</name>
    <name.id>102376</name.id>
    <electorate>Brand</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you to the member for Hasluck for her question. The natural resources of this great continent are literally the bedrock and the starting point for a future made in Australia. The Prime Minister recently announced in Western Australia the groundbreaking Resourcing Australia's Prosperity program. Our government is investing $3.4 billion over 35 years for Geoscience Australia to find new deposits of minerals and sources of energy to build a future made in Australia. This is the largest investment of any Australian government in precompetitive geoscience, the science and exploration for the resources we need to get to net zero. All of the minerals and the rare earths we need for essential supply chains and green technology needed for net zero are found here in Australia. We just need to know where to find them, as Australia is 80 per cent underexplored. This is a generational investment in the science underpinning the resources sector and is an absolute game changer.</para>
<para>Along with a 10 per cent critical minerals production tax incentive, this is the most significant budget for the resources sector in this country ever. And we must remember: if companies don't make a value-added product, they don't receive a tax credit. It is an incentive based on success. We've also committed over $10 million of planning for critical minerals common user facilities in partnerships with the states and territories, who have welcomed these initiatives—as, I might add, have the Liberal and Nationals leaders in Western Australia.</para>
<para>So what is standing in the way? What are the barriers to these policies, I am asked. To be frank, they are the shadow Treasurer, the Leader of the Opposition and probably the whole of the LNP of Queensland. I wonder if they have taken the time to ask the Queensland Resources Council what they think of these policies.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order. The member for Barker will cease interjecting.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MADELEINE KING</name>
    <name.id>102376</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>If they had, they would know that Janette Hewson, the CEO of the QRC, has said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The Critical Minerals Production Tax Incentive, funding to progress common user facilities and $566 million to Geoscience Australia to develop new data are all important announcements that will benefit our critical minerals industry.</para></quote>
<para>Those opposite pretend to be a friend of the west, but nothing could be further from the truth. Maybe they would have consulted the Chamber of Minerals and Energy of Western Australia. As CEO Rebecca Tomkinson has said, 'It is pleasing to see the federal government adopt CME recommendations such as the production tax incentive for critical minerals and funding for common-user infrastructure.' Now, the QRC and the CME of WA are hardly the stalwarts of support for the Australian Labor Party, but they know a good policy when they see it.</para>
<para>What we know is that the opposition choose to act not in the national interest but in their own self-interest. They want to offshore Australia's future; we will make a future here in Australia.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Disability Insurance Scheme</title>
          <page.no>23</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SUKKAR</name>
    <name.id>242515</name.id>
    <electorate>Deakin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme and Minister for Government Services. With shocking revelations out of budget estimates last night that illicit drugs such as heroin, cocaine, speed and ice are being trafficked through the NDIS, with the NDIA officials admitting, 'You name it; it's on the list,' why has the minister allowed illegal drugs to be trafficked to Australia's most vulnerable and paid for by taxpayers under the scheme that you designed?</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! Members on my right will cease interjecting. The Deputy Prime Minister will cease interjecting. The minister for climate change. The minister doesn't have the call.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for McEwen is warned. Interjecting before a minister even begins her or his answer is highly disorderly.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SHORTEN</name>
    <name.id>00ATG</name.id>
    <electorate>Maribyrnong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to acknowledge the member for Deakin's inaugural question to me on the NDIS in this term of government. The NDIS is changing lives. I actually think that most members of the House are very committed to seeing the NDIS deliver the outcomes that it was designed to deliver for people with disability. But the NDIS needs to be got back on track.</para>
<para>The member goes to one of the questions about the future of the scheme, which is making sure that every dollar gets through to the participants for whom it's designed. I agree that there are issues in terms of fraud in the scheme. But these issues of fraud did not start yesterday. The reality is that this scheme was initiated by Labor, and then the Liberals came into power and there's no doubt that they increased the size of the scheme. But I would have to mark their stewardship of the scheme as incompetent and naive because they failed to create systems—</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The minister will pause. Order! Members on my right will cease interjecting. The Minister for Home Affairs will cease interjecting, and the Minister for Climate Change and Energy is not helping the situation. The member for Deakin is entitled to raise a point of order and he has the call.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Sukkar</name>
    <name.id>242515</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thanks, very much, Mr Speaker. The point of order is on relevance. The minister should stick to his very expensive script. It can't be relevant to be speaking about drugs that are being sold—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Resume your seat. I'll deal with it. I thought this was clear yesterday when I dealt with the member for Fairfax. The minister will pause and resume his seat for a moment. We're not going to have points of order with statements and have the standing orders being abused. I made that crystal clear yesterday with the member for Fairfax. As I just indicated to the member for Deakin, he was entitled under the standing orders to raise a point of order—of course, he's allowed to do that. I think he knows that the next course of action is that he will leave the chamber under 94(a) for abusing the standing orders.</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 minister's going to return to the question. He wasn't asked about alternative approaches. He wasn't asked about the opposition. He was asked a specific question regarding estimates and issues raised through the estimates process. I'm going to make sure he's remaining directly relevant to the question.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SHORTEN</name>
    <name.id>00ATG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thanks for your guidance, Mr Speaker. I was asked about fraud in the scheme and I'm explaining the origins of it.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Barker is warned.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SHORTEN</name>
    <name.id>00ATG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The reality is that the NDIS is a good idea, but under the coalition it was badly managed. One of the naive mistakes they made is that, whilst they paid out money to participants and service providers, they failed to do anything about the system into which they were paying it. We have 87 per cent of service providers who are unregistered. We have no way of knowing what they do when they put in their invoices.</para>
<para>We also have a scheme where they didn't set up proper monitoring of the payment system. As I explained recently to the House, to my shock and horror upon becoming Minister for the NDIS, I discovered that, under the previous government, when payment applications, or requests to be paid, were made, the agency—we've rectified this now—would only check 20. That's 20 out of hundreds of thousands of claims daily. I then found out in particular that, between 5 pm and 6.30 pm on any given day, nothing got checked. They literally decided to get the money out so quickly that if you made a claim between five and 6.30—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The minister will pause. He's had two minutes, and I gave an instruction before. I can understand he's bringing some history into this issue, but the question wasn't about the history of what he's talking about. It was about a specific matter raised in the estimates. He's going to have to address that, otherwise he'll be resuming his seat.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SHORTEN</name>
    <name.id>00ATG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>We are getting on with fixing up the fraud. We have got 500-plus compliance matters under investigation. We have 222 investigations underway. We have 20 prosecutions in the court. We have another 12 matters currently with the DPP to consider. Clearly, it is illegal for anyone to claim items which are not allowed under the scheme. The one difference between us and those people opposite is we're doing something about fixing up the scheme. You did nothing.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Nuclear Energy</title>
          <page.no>24</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms DOYLE</name>
    <name.id>299962</name.id>
    <electorate>Aston</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. What has been the response to the latest analysis from the CSIRO, which has once again confirmed that nuclear is the most expensive form of energy?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
    <electorate>McMahon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the honourable member, who is a fantastic member for Aston, for her question. As the honourable member knows, <inline font-style="italic">GenCost</inline> is a report which has been issued annually by the CSIRO and AEMO since 2018. It has consistently found nuclear energy to be the most expensive form of energy available, and slow to build as well. Between 2018 and 2022, this was an uncontroversial report. In fact, the previous government used to source and cite <inline font-style="italic">GenCost</inline> in their report to the Paris accord. They used to reference it.</para>
<para>This is no longer the case. The Leader of the Opposition was asked about <inline font-style="italic">GenCost</inline> in March and about its findings that nuclear is the most expensive form of energy. He said, 'It is a discredited report, not to be relied on, and it's not a genuine piece of work.' This is the alternative Prime Minister of Australia talking about Australia's premier scientific organisation. Did he reflect on his policy and say, 'Maybe we need to reconsider?' No. When the Leader of the Opposition sees a report telling him he's wrong, he attacks the CSIRO, much like when he sees a news report he doesn't like—he attacks the journalist on Twitter. That's his modus operandi. That's how he behaves as the alternative Prime Minister.</para>
<para>He's not alone. The architect of this policy disaster, the member for Fairfax, had something to say about <inline font-style="italic">GenCost</inline>. When he was asked originally about <inline font-style="italic">GenCost</inline>, he said, 'The CSIRO hasn't released its modelling.'</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Barker is warned.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>He called on the CSIRO to release their modelling. There's a certain irony here. The architect of the plan says, 'We haven't seen the modelling.' We haven't seen the opposition's policy either. That takes some chutzpah. I've seen some chutzpah in my time in this place, but that takes the yellowcake! This is an opposition which is treating the Australian people with contempt. The member for Fairfax then had a little chat to the CSIRO. He gave them a little TED Talk explaining where they're wrong, which I'm sure they welcomed. I'm sure these experienced economists and scientists welcomed the member for Fairfax telling them why they've got it so wrong. The CSIRO has responded by saying:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We stand by those figures—based on the best global information and applied to local conditions—which allow a meaningful comparison of future energy costs generated by various technologies in the Australian context.</para></quote>
<para>Is it any wonder, with all this chaos and the opposition attacking Australia's premier scientific organisation, that coalition backbenchers are calling their policy 'bonkers' and 'bewildering'? That is perhaps why the Leader of the Opposition hasn't had the guts to release it. He said he'd release it in a couple of weeks 12 weeks ago. He says, 'Oh, we won't be held to your timetable.' He won't be held to his own, which is just another reflection of the fact that the Leader of the Opposition is not up to the job. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DISTINGUISHED VISITORS</title>
        <page.no>25</page.no>
        <type>DISTINGUISHED VISITORS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Kogler, Her Excellency Mrs Elisabeth, Singh, Hon. Lisa, Kumar, Ms Sunaina, Sinha, Ms Riya, Patchett, Mr Lucas Brooke, OAM, Fraser, Hon. Andrew Peter</title>
          <page.no>25</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:15</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 is Her Excellency Elisabeth Kogler, the new Ambassador of the Republic of Austria. I'm pleased to inform the House that also present in the gallery today is the Hon. Lisa Singh, a former senator and the CEO of the Australia India Institute, with Maitri fellows Sunaina Kumar and Riya Sinha. Also in the gallery is Lucas Patchett OAM, a co-founder of Orange Sky Australia, and the Hon. Andrew Fraser, a former Deputy Premier of Queensland and Chair of Orange Sky Australia. Welcome to you all.</para>
<para>Honourable members: Hear, hear!</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</title>
        <page.no>25</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Physical and Sexual Harassment and Violence</title>
          <page.no>25</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms DANIEL</name>
    <name.id>008CH</name.id>
    <electorate>Goldstein</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Attorney-General. Women across Australia are not getting the legal support they need to escape or recover from family, domestic or sexual violence. The independent review of the National Legal Assistance Partnership, released last week, has recommended that funding for women's legal services be separated from the general community legal centres stream. A dedicated funding stream would ensure that legal assistance reaches victims-survivors of gendered violence. Will the government support this recommendation?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Goldstein for her question. The Albanese government recognises the pressures that all legal assistance services, including women's legal services, are under and the importance of strengthening the sector. Legal assistance is essential to ensuring access to justice and equality before the law. Since becoming Attorney-General, and while in opposition, I've visited many women's legal services across the country. I know how hard they work. I know the importance of the work they do. For women fleeing violence, women's legal services provide advice and support to keep them from harm.</para>
<para>The National Legal Assistance Partnership between the Commonwealth and the states and territories is a five-year agreement to fund vital legal assistance services, including women's legal services, for the most vulnerable Australians and expires on 30 June 2025. Dr Warren Mundy was commissioned—jointly, by the Commonwealth with the states and territories—to review the current agreement and to make recommendations to inform the new agreement. Dr Mundy's review has now been publicly released. It will help inform the negotiations for the new partnership agreement, which is due to commence on 1 July 2025. Negotiations with the states and territories will continue over coming months to shape the new agreement.</para>
<para>I would note that $44.1 million of urgent funding was announced in the budget for the legal assistance sector. The government understands absolutely that this will not fix all of the issues currently facing the sector, but it is an acknowledgement of the resource and workforce issues. It's intended to directly assist with wage parity issues that have beset the sector for some time. This urgent funding will relieve some of the pressures until the commencement of the next partnership agreement.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Budget</title>
          <page.no>25</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ZAPPIA</name>
    <name.id>HWB</name.id>
    <electorate>Makin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. What actions is the Albanese Labor government taking to ensure we can make more things here in Australia, and is there any opposition to building our future here?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank very much the member for Makin for the question. Indeed, we have delivered a budget that was focused on two things. The first is helping with the cost of living without adding to inflation. We've seen this week the increase in the minimum wage of 3.75 per cent, so we know that, together with our tax cuts for all 13.6 million taxpayers, we will be able to deliver people earning more and keeping more of what they earn. In addition to that, we have cheaper medicines, the latest element of which was signed yesterday by the health minister with the Pharmacy Guild. In addition to that, the budget focused on: how does economic growth continue in the future? We know that we need to always plan forward and look for where those opportunities are. We do have an opportunity to build our future here in Australia by becoming a renewable energy superpower, by investing in solar, wind and new energy, by investing in manufacturing and critical minerals, by investing in skills, TAFEs and universities, by creating jobs in our suburbs and regions and by making sure that, whilst our resources are being exported—that will continue to be important to us—where we can, we move up the value chain. How do we add value first and create jobs rather than just export the resources, wait for the jobs to be created somewhere else and then pay a higher price when that comes back to us? We need to use our resources to make things here.</para>
<para>Building energy security builds economic security but, importantly, as well it builds our national security. We see the shift to renewable energy as a whole-of-nation opportunity, and it demands a whole-of-economy approach. That's why our production tax incentive for companies that produce things like hydrogen and critical minerals is so important. This is an incentive payment that delivers based upon success. It rewards success. It's a simple and practical idea that has sent those opposite into a tailspin and divided their party.</para>
<para>What is their response to making more things here? The Leader of the Opposition says we can't have manufacturing without nuclear power. It's 'no reactor, no start' from this bloke. That's what his plan is. It's a false choice that he's trying to force on Australia. We know that the CSIRO has said, 'This won't be ready until 2040.' As the member for Makin knows, it was a decade ago that those opposite told the car industry to leave Adelaide and to leave Australia and to take the jobs with them. We support jobs here and a future made here. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Visa Refusal or Cancellation</title>
          <page.no>26</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
    <electorate>Wannon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs. The <inline font-style="italic">West Australia</inline><inline font-style="italic">n</inline> newspaper has just published a report that yesterday another noncitizen described as having a long criminal history, including kidnapping, reckless conduct endangering life and being a reported associate of Tony Mokbel, has escaped deportation because of ministerial direction 99. Minister, have you cancelled his visa?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GILES</name>
    <name.id>243609</name.id>
    <electorate>Scullin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Wannon for his question. I have, over the last week, cancelled 35 visas and there are more under review. I am aware of the case that the shadow minister refers to, which was decided by the AAT yesterday. It is under consideration in accordance with the national interest. I note again, though, that these are cases where my department had maintained the cancellation of the visa under the ministerial direction, unlike under the Leader of the Opposition, where there were 1,298. One of them the Prime Minister went to yesterday on an individual with convictions for a sexual based offence in relation to a girl under 14 and for repeatedly breaching bail conditions. The opposition leader failed—</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GILES</name>
    <name.id>243609</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>They don't want to hear about this. I wonder why not!</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Wannon on a point of order?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Tehan</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, it goes to relevance. The question was very specific as to whether the minister has cancelled the visa of this associate of Tony Mokbel.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Burke</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>On the point of order, Mr Speaker, what the minister is doing is a direct compare and contrast between whether people under the ministerial direction were having their visa cancelled or whether under ministerial direction people were being released. That's the difference. When it's a direct compare and contrast, that has always been within direct relevance.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm just going to hear from the Manager of Opposition Business.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Fletcher</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Just on the response that the Leader of the House has given: he has effectively just admitted that the minister was breaching standing orders. It was a very clear, direct question, and the minister needs to deal with the direct question he was asked.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Whilst the Leader of the House is correct about some compare and contrast, the minister will need to make sure his answer is relevant to the direction—whether it be direction 90 or as a result of direction 90, which was before direction 99, involving the decisions involved—not simply talk about the past. He will need to make sure his answer is directly relevant with the decisions that he has made, in particular, with this case.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Tehan</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Just on the point of order, Mr Speaker.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I was pretty clear on what the minister should be doing. I'll listen carefully. Out of respect for the member for Wannon and his seniority, I will grant him the call.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Tehan</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Ministerial direction 99 was what it specifically related to.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm aware of that, but before 99 there was direction 90. I understand the issue. Thank you for your assistance, Member for Wannon. The minister has the call.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GILES</name>
    <name.id>243609</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you for your assistance, Speaker. I say again: I'm aware of the case that the shadow minister referred to. It was a decision handed down by the AAT yesterday. It is under consideration in accordance with the national interest, as is the case. I also say that there are other cases which have been overturned by the AAT—in particular, the one the Prime Minister referred to in question time yesterday. This is the case where the now opposition leader failed to do anything after the AAT overturned a decision, and it's now alleged the individual in question went on to reoffend very, very seriously.</para>
<para><inline font-style="italic">An opposition member interjecting</inline>—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>No, I'm not taking a point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GILES</name>
    <name.id>243609</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>On Saturday I did what the now opposition leader should have done and cancelled this individual's visa.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Regional Australia</title>
          <page.no>27</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SWANSON</name>
    <name.id>264170</name.id>
    <electorate>Paterson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government. How will the Albanese Labor government's Future Made in Australia plans benefit regional Australia? What challenges stand in the way?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CATHERINE KING</name>
    <name.id>00AMR</name.id>
    <electorate>Ballarat</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you very much to the member for Paterson for that question. She, of course, is a very strong advocate for jobs in her region and knows that our Future Made in Australia plan will deliver benefits for all of regional Australia. Whether it be renewable hydrogen, solar panels and batteries, green metals or critical minerals processing, our Future Made in Australia plan is all about jobs in the regions.</para>
<para>A great example of that is low-carbon liquid fuels. Right now, 60 per cent of Australian canola exported to Europe is used to produce biofuels, and we export 400 kilotonnes of our tallow, largely from our abattoirs, to Europe for the same purpose each and every single year—Australian feedstock being shipped offshore, creating jobs overseas, with some of that final product being reimported into Australia. Our Future Made in Australia plan will see more of this product being transformed here in Australia into sustainable fuels—for our planes, for our ships and for our heavy vehicles. Our budget will see more investment in local projects and innovation. We are creating the building blocks for this industry right here in Australia. We will consult on demand-side measures and we will shortly be engaging with industry on the final form of a production incentive to kickstart local manufacturing of sustainable fuels.</para>
<para>You would think that growing new Australian jobs and industries, particularly in our regions, would unite this parliament, but no. This is all opposed by those opposite, who have confirmed that they will not support the Future Made in Australia, including the development of a low-carbon liquid fuel industry. Why is that? Of course, we know they have form when it comes to opposing Australian manufacturing and Australian industry. We know they killed the car industry here in Australia. They of course, notably, had a defence minister who said that they wouldn't trust Australian industry to build a canoe, and now they have a shadow Treasurer who spent his entire pre-parliamentary career advocating against local jobs.</para>
<para>On this side, we support Australian industries.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Pasin</name>
    <name.id>240756</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Hands up if you've employed someone.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CATHERINE KING</name>
    <name.id>00AMR</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>We have local content rules in our infrastructure, and we have local job and training requirements too. On their side, they have a shadow Treasurer who calls support for Australian industries a 'wasted effort'. That's what he said to the Minerals Council of Australia when he was advocating the scrapping of local content policies with the closure of aluminium refining in Australia.</para>
<para>While this government is working to deliver a future made in Australia, particularly in our regions, the coalition—</para>
<para><inline font-style="italic">An opposition member interjecting</inline>—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CATHERINE KING</name>
    <name.id>00AMR</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Yes, I have, thank you—wants a future made overseas.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Economy</title>
          <page.no>27</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TAYLOR</name>
    <name.id>231027</name.id>
    <electorate>Hume</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Treasurer. The latest ABS monthly data shows domestic inflation is growing at five times imported inflation. It also shows core inflation increased to 4.1 per cent in April, which is higher than the UK, the US, Japan, Canada and the euro area. After three failed Labor budgets driving up the price of groceries, electricity and mortgages, will the Treasurer finally admit, as the RBA governor has pointed out, that inflation is homegrown?</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! Before the Treasurer begins his answer, the member for Barker is on a warning, and I know he wants to stay to hear this answer, so he won't be interjecting at all during this answer. The Treasurer has the call.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr CHALMERS</name>
    <name.id>37998</name.id>
    <electorate>Rankin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>If he's angry at inflation with a three in front of it, he must have been absolutely filthy about the six per cent that they left us with. When we came to office, inflation had a six in front of it. Now it's got a three in front of it, it's still too high. We acknowledge that it's still too high with a three in front of it, but it's almost half what we inherited from those opposite, and I think that more than anything explains why the shadow Treasurer hardly ever gets any questions. The truth is that when we came to office there were bigger deficits, there was more than a trillion dollars in Liberal debt. We were paying too much in interest on the debt. We had almost nothing to show for all the waste and rorts for which the shadow Treasurer was the poster child in the former government. So we have spent two years cleaning up the mess that we inherited from the—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Treasurer will pause. The member for Hume will state his point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Taylor</name>
    <name.id>231027</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It is relevance. The Treasurer has been begging for a question about his budget that sank without a trace. You made an excellent earlier ruling about history. Can I ask you make a similar ruling in this instance?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question contained information regarding the budget, inflation and a whole range of other points. So far, the Treasurer has been directly relevant.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Taylor</name>
    <name.id>231027</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm talking about the relevance.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>You can't ask about data in questions without the context of that, so I'll allow him some latitude. He is being directly relevant in terms of the topic and the issue. You may not like the answer, but he is being directly relevant. He won't be going through the history of what's happened in the past 10 years, but he's obviously able to talk about how we got to where we are. The Treasurer has the call.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Dr CHALMERS</name>
    <name.id>37998</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Without a hint of self-awareness, the shadow Treasurer talks about something that sank without a trace. The least relevant person in the parliament wants to get up and talk about relevance. He asked me about inflation and he asked me about the budget. The budget was designed to put downward pressure on inflation, and our responsible economic management is one of the reasons why inflation is almost half what we inherited from those opposite, when the shadow Treasurer was the most embarrassing part of an embarrassing government.</para>
<para>Inflation is lower now than when we came to office. We've turned two big Liberal deficits into two Labor surpluses. We've improved the bottom line by $215 billion. Debt this year is $150 billion lower than what we inherited. Next year it'll be $185 billion lower than what we inherited. That means we'll avoid $80 billion in interest costs on the debt that they racked up. Because of all of that—because of that responsible economic management—we are making welcome and encouraging progress on the big economic challenges that we inherited when we came to office two years ago.</para>
<para>I am the first to acknowledge that we would like inflation to moderate further and faster. We've made that clear on a number of occasions. That's why the budget has cost-of-living help which is designed in a way to be part of the solution to our inflation challenge, not part of the problem. It's why we're managing the budget in a responsible way, cleaning up the mess we inherited from those opposite. At the same time we recognise we've also got a growth challenge in our economy as well. We're fighting inflation without smashing the economy. We've seen some progress since we came to office. If those opposite were still in government, inflation would be higher, debt and deficit would be bigger and the economy would be even weaker.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Medicare: Urgent Care Clinics</title>
          <page.no>28</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BRIAN MITCHELL</name>
    <name.id>129164</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyons</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Health and Aged Care. How is the Albanese Labor government making it easier for patients to see a doctor with urgent care clinics? Why is it so important to invest in Medicare after a decade of cuts and neglect?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUTLER</name>
    <name.id>HWK</name.id>
    <electorate>Hindmarsh</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Lyons for his question. At the last election he and the rest of the Labor team promised the Australian people that, if elected, we would strengthen Medicare through a boost to bulk-billing, through cheaper medicines and through a network of urgent care clinics. We've been busy on this side delivering on that promise. In less than a year our 58 urgent care clinics have already delivered care to 425,000 Australians—all fully bulk-billed, one in four of them under the age of 15, one out of four services delivered on the weekend when we know people can't get in to their GP, and we are taking real pressure off our hospital system.</para>
<para>The member for Lyons and I were at one of those clinics in Hobart last month and we were told by the operator that 80 per cent of their patients said that, if the clinic wasn't open, they'd have had to go down the road to the Royal Hobart Hospital emergency department. The member for Lyons and I were there to announce the $28 million Strengthening Medicare package out of last month's budget. The package includes more funding for the four terrific urgent care clinics already operating in Tasmania, helping them care for more Tasmanians, and also includes funding for a fifth clinic in Tasmania, in the Bridgewater area, servicing not just Bridgewater itself but surrounding communities like Brighton and the northern suburbs of Hobart. I pay credit to the member for Lyons, who has been a relentless advocate for this clinic in his electorate.</para>
<para>The Tasmanian package will also deliver better support to older patients, helping them avoid having to go to hospital in the first place, if possible, but if they do have to go to hospital allowing them to be discharged as soon as clinically possible. This is not just good for them; we know it will relieve much-needed pressure on the hospital system as well. The member for Lyons knows this and the government knows the Tasmanian health system is under real pressure, which is why our Strengthening Medicare program is just so important. It is not just urgent care clinics; in just five months the GP bulk-billing rate in Tasmania has climbed above five per cent, delivering tens of thousands of additional free visits to the GP—the best result of any state in the Federation. Tens of thousands of Tasmanians are benefiting from cheaper medicines as well.</para>
<para>We know there is more to do but we are starting to repair the damage from the Leader of the Opposition's horror health budget of 10 years ago, when he wanted to cut $50 billion from hospitals, abolish bulk-billing altogether and jack up the price of medicines by up to $5 a script. That's not the Labor way because the DNA of Labor includes Medicare at its heart. That's why we're working so hard to strengthen it.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cost of Living</title>
          <page.no>29</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PRICE</name>
    <name.id>249308</name.id>
    <electorate>Durack</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Treasurer. Data from Western Australia's regional price index shows costs have risen sharply in regional WA. Halls Creek resident Sarah told ABC News, 'We can't even buy the food to keep them going because it's too expensive.' Tom Price business owner Ted said, 'My milk I used to buy was $3.70; now it's $6.20.' Will the Treasurer finally admit Labor's inflation is homegrown?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr CHALMERS</name>
    <name.id>37998</name.id>
    <electorate>Rankin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>A couple of important points about that question. As I acknowledged in the answer a moment ago, we know that people are under pressure whether in Western Australia or, indeed, right around Australia. Inflation was much higher when those opposite were in office, but it's still too high now. That's why our budget is so focused on making sure we are providing cost-of-living help to people.</para>
<para>If the honourable member was serious about these cost-of-living pressures, she would enthusiastically support our efforts to give a tax cut to every taxpayer in her community and right around Australia. If she was serious about these cost-of-living pressures she would enthusiastically support our energy bill relief for every household in her community and in our community, she would enthusiastically support an increase to the minimum wage, she would enthusiastically support our efforts to make medicines cheaper and she would enthusiastically support our efforts to cut student debt for students right around Australia.</para>
<para>We know that people are doing it tough and we know that people are under the pump. That's why our budget was so focused on fighting inflation without smashing the economy. A key part of that—arguably the most important part of that—is cost-of-living relief right around the country, including in WA.</para>
<para>It would be remiss of me, getting a question from WA—and following on from the Minister for Resources a moment ago to point out—to point out how substantial the support is for the Western Australian economy in the budget. Probably no budget—and certainly not one that I've been here for in the last couple of decades—has been more focused on the vast economic and industrial opportunities of the Western Australian people and workers and businesses and investors. It beggars belief from a party that pretends to support Western Australia that since we released the budget, with all of its focus on WA industries, those opposite couldn't find it within themselves to support WA.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Economy, Budget</title>
          <page.no>29</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELYEA</name>
    <name.id>309484</name.id>
    <electorate>Dunkley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Treasurer. How is the Albanese Labor government responding to the challenges in our economy in a responsible and balanced way, and 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 Dunkley not just for her question but for helping to ensure that every one of the 73,000 taxpayers in her community will get a tax cut, every one of the 65,000 households in her community will get energy bill relief, and tens of thousands of workers in her community will get a pay rise next month as well.</para>
<para>We know the economic conditions are challenging and that people are under the pump. The Treasury forecasts in the budget anticipate weak growth in our economy because of higher interest rates and global economic uncertainty. That's what economists are expecting to see in tomorrow's national accounts, which cover the first three months of this calendar year. We'll see the details in the data tomorrow, but the impact of the interest rate rises is showing up in the consumption data and the retail trade data that's already been released, and in building approvals and the softening of the labour market as well.</para>
<para>Some of the most hawkish commentary we see completely misses the fact that the economy is already soft and people are already under pressure. As I said a moment ago, our strategy is to fight inflation without smashing the economy. Our responsible, measured and methodical economic management is carefully calibrated for the combination of challenges that we confront together. It would have been absolutely mad to slash and burn in the budget in these circumstances. It would have been crazy to tighten the screws even further on a soft economy and on people who are already doing it tough.</para>
<para>Those opposite made a mess of the budget, and now they describe things like the indexation of the age pension as overspending. No wonder nobody takes them seriously on the economy. Our approach is much more responsible and methodical and measured than the free advice that we get from those opposite and from elsewhere. Our strategy is about putting downward pressure on inflation without crunching the economy, it's all about turning Liberal deficits into Labor surpluses, getting debt down and paying less interest on the debt. It's all about investing in the industries which will power a future made in Australia. It's all about tax cuts and energy bill relief and cost-of-living help designed to ease the pressures that people are under and to support our economy when growth is weak.</para>
<para>We'll see the national accounts tomorrow, but it is already clear that our responsible economic management is exactly right for the combination of challenges that we confront together in the economy. If we took the approach recommended by those opposite, inflation would be higher, deficits would be bigger, Australians would be under even more pressure and the economy would be in worse shape.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DISTINGUISHED VISITORS</title>
        <page.no>30</page.no>
        <type>DISTINGUISHED VISITORS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Hills Christian Community College, Verdun</title>
          <page.no>30</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 advise the House that in the southern gallery today are senior school captains from the Hills Christian Community School in Verdun in South Australia in the member for Mayo's electorate.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</title>
        <page.no>30</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Mental Health</title>
          <page.no>30</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SPENDER</name>
    <name.id>286042</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Health and Aged Care. The senseless attack at Bondi Junction on 13 April left six people dead and traumatised my community. The perpetrator experienced severe mental health problems and had fallen through the cracks of our mental health system. Since the attack, I have been contacted by the families and friends of many others who are experiencing complex mental health conditions. They are desperately worried about their loved ones and they are crying out for more support. What is the government doing to support those with the most complex conditions and to fix our broken mental health system?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUTLER</name>
    <name.id>HWK</name.id>
    <electorate>Hindmarsh</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Wentworth for her question. I want to pay tribute to her representation of a community that has been doing it so tough, particularly over the last several months. She and I, and the Leader of the Opposition, were at a gathering of I think about 10,000 members of Sydney's Jewish community, so many of whom live in her electorate, in the days after the heinous terrorist attacks on 7 October. We saw firsthand in those early days the grief, horror and trauma experienced by that community, which has been compounded by the horrific rise in antisemitism. Your representation and your compassion to your community has been extraordinary.</para>
<para>On top of that, your community has had to deal with the horrific attacks at Bondi Junction and the trauma that has reverberated through your community, in particular, and right through Sydney—and, to a degree, Australia as well. I've really appreciated the engagement you've shown to our government in trying to design what supports we can to help your community through this period of trauma, grief and dislocation. Obviously, this is a series of programs that has been a subject of negotiation with the New South Wales government as well.</para>
<para>But you're right to talk of the gaps. Family members or victims of the Bondi Junction attack have pointed to the, frankly, very large gaps in supports for people with severe and persistent mental illness. This has been an enduring discussion in Australia since the deinstitutionalisation processes of 30 years ago. Many people with severe and persistent mental illness, including psychotic disorders, receive terrific support from the NDIS, but we know that too many fall outside of that system. Many of the psychosocial programs that were in place before the NDIS were rolled into that scheme and, frankly, we're just really trying to hold that population through schemes that were intended to operate for a period of time while we designed an alternative set of arrangements. In many cases they're not cracks, they are very big chasms for support.</para>
<para>States are undertaking unmet needs analysis as part of an agreement with the former government that I applaud. We know this is going to number tens and tens of thousands of Australian not getting the support that they need. This will be a very big focus of the foundational supports process that the Minister for Social Services is leading with the states and territories. We're trying to do what we can through the strengthening Medicare agenda. I see that the New South Wales government made some announcements today for additional supports following Premier Minns' commitment, as part of the coronial inquest, to do better. As the Prime Minister said, it's for us to do better for a group that, frankly, has not been sufficiently supported in the past 30 years, in spite of the broad promises to do so. I thank the member for her engagement on this important issue.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Vocational Education and Training</title>
          <page.no>31</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DAVID SMITH</name>
    <name.id>276714</name.id>
    <electorate>Bean</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Skills and Training. How is the Albanese Labor government building our skilled workforce in vital areas like housing, construction, the care economy and renewables, while also supporting more people into well-paid and secure work? Why is this action so desperately needed?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr O'CONNOR</name>
    <name.id>00AN3</name.id>
    <electorate>Gorton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Bean for his question and, indeed, for his strong advocacy for the VET sector across the country. I'll say this too: when we came to government, we inherited the worst skills shortage in more than half a century. The shortages extended across the labour market and were as deep as they were wide. That's why we convened the Jobs and Skills Summit, and that's why in last year alone more than 355,000 Australians enrolled in fee-free TAFE, and a further 320,000 places are available from this year on in areas of demand. It's why we struck the National Skills Agreement with the state and territory governments, the first National Skills Agreement in a decade. In a decade, you on that side did not sign up one agreement in the skills area—not one! This is $30 billion. We're also giving more support to apprentices and employers, because, when the opposition were last in government, their last budget cut support—</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The minister will pause. There's far too much noise on my left. The minister will direct his remarks through the chair and not use the word 'you'.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr O'CONNOR</name>
    <name.id>00AN3</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>In their last budget, they cut support for apprentices and employers. We've attended to that, because the Albanese government knows that apprentices need more support, not less support. Under a Labor government, from 1 July the new first-year incentive for those employing apprentices in priority areas will increase by $1,000 what was proposed under the Liberals' last budget, while apprentices will receive $5,000 in direct financial support, an increase of $2,000 from what was planned by the previous government. And, of course, from 1 July every apprentice in this country will receive a tax cut, and they would not have received it under those opposite.</para>
<para>In contrast, the opposition have called fee-free TAFE 'wasteful spending'. They don't support the new energy apprenticeships. They don't support the extra 20,000 fee-free TAFE places in the housing and construction sector. In fact, they don't support any investment in energy or housing. You'd think that, as the country battles through the largest skills shortage, which we were bequeathed, they would have something to say about skills. But, after the budget reply speech by the Leader of the Opposition, employer groups rebuked the opposition leader—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The minister will just pause and resume his seat for a second so I can hear from the Leader of the Opposition on a point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Dutton</name>
    <name.id>00AKI</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It's on relevance. The member started out very Zen and calm, but he has now elevated to a point where he is quite unhinged and unhelpful to the order of the House. He wasn't asked about alternative policies. If he could just calm down, take deep breaths and find his inner self, he could answer the question appropriately.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>There are two problems I have with the way that was done. First of all, it was a reflection on a member. We had this debate last week, on 30 May, when the Manager of Opposition Business was crystal clear about, as he said, the 'repeated practice of undignified personal attacks'. So we're just going to ensure that that doesn't happen again. The minister is being directly relevant. It is against standing order 90 to use reflection on a member. I just hope everyone remembers that. We had this discussion last week, and I hoped, as I said at the time, that in questions and answers it would improve. I am just going to remind everyone again of that statement the manager made last week.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! You never know your luck.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr O'CONNOR</name>
    <name.id>00AN3</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Well, I won't be taking anger management lessons from the Leader of the Opposition, I assure you. When it comes to skills, the employer bodies have said that the opposition leader has no clue. They called his budget reply 'a momentous act of economic self-harm', and the Business Council actually said that it will 'compound our existing skills shortages and make it harder to do business'. I need no anger management lessons from you, I assure you.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Immigration Detention</title>
          <page.no>32</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:53</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FLETCHER</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
    <electorate>Bradfield</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Home Affairs. Yesterday in question time the minister was asked if the ABF drone fleet remained grounded. The minister chuckled at the dispatch box and responded, 'This was dealt with by estimates in ABF, and I invite you to look at the transcript.' The minister knows this was not an accurate statement. Why hasn't the minister advised the House of her latest mistake?</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The member for Bruce. The member for Werriwa. Whatever's happening up there can stop immediately.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms O'NEIL</name>
    <name.id>140590</name.id>
    <electorate>Hotham</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The shadow minister is incorrect. The last public statement on this matter was made by ABF at estimates, and I encourage him to review the transcript.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Housing</title>
          <page.no>32</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEMPLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>181810</name.id>
    <electorate>Macquarie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Housing and for Homelessness. How is the Albanese Labor government's Homes for Australia plan helping improve housing affordability, and what could block future progress?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COLLINS</name>
    <name.id>HWM</name.id>
    <electorate>Franklin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to thank our terrific member for Macquarie. I know that she knows that we're working to address the housing challenges that we inherited from those opposite. Our $32 billion Homes for Australia plan will help boost our country's housing supply and ensure that more Australians have a safe, affordable place to call home. Indeed there was more than $6 billion for Homes for Australia in the most recent budget, including a $1.9 billion increase to the Commonwealth rent assistance. This is the first back-to-back increase in more than 30 years to help the nearly one million households who are doing it tough right now.</para>
<para>But of course we know the best way to deal with housing affordability is to add to supply, and that is what we're focused on. That's why we're working with all tiers of government and the housing sector to meet the ambitious national target of 1.2 million homes by the end of the decade. We've put billions on the table to help the states and territories boost their supply and to reduce the red tape, including through the $2 billion Social Housing Accelerator. This investment is already helping Australians into homes, like the one our Prime Minister visited in Sydney last week. Across New South Wales now more than 700 people have a safe, affordable place to call home thanks to funds from the Social Housing Accelerator. This is life changing for those people, and it shows what is possible when you work with the other tiers of government.</para>
<para>Of course we all need to have our shoulder to the wheel to meet this national target, and last week, at the housing and homelessness ministerial council, the states and territories signed up to a $9.3 billion new housing agreement. It is only by working together that we will boost supply and provide more help for homebuyers, more help for renters and more help for Australians who need a safe, affordable place to call home.</para>
<para>This is in stark contrast to those opposite. They didn't want to work with the states when they were in government, they're saying they're not going to have a target for building homes, they voted against the Housing Australia Future Fund and they conspired with the Greens to hold it up for at least six months. Now we have the shadow minister coming in here today saying that homes won't be built under the fund—the fund that they voted against. They opposed the Help to Buy bill in this House. That will be coming before the Senate shortly. And they don't have a plan for housing at all other than the rehashed thought bubble which we got from the Leader of the Opposition. We got not one new dollar for one new home, but we did get 'raid your super for housing' again. It's something that he knows will drive up house prices and something that he knows won't build a single home. And, of course, we know it will wreck people's retirement. While they're full of negativity, we're going to get on and build the homes that Australia desperately needs so that more Australians have a safe, affordable place to call home.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Discrimination</title>
          <page.no>32</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BATES</name>
    <name.id>300246</name.id>
    <electorate>Brisbane</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Attorney-General. Right now LGBTIQA+ people can be fired from their place of work if they come out. The Prime Minister reportedly told caucus there are two ways for your government's antidiscrimination bills to pass parliament: one with the coalition and one with the Greens. You've given the coalition draft legislation but not the Greens or the crossbench, despite repeated requests. Will you commit today to providing us with a copy of the legislation so that we can work with you to pass it?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank member for his question. The Albanese government believes that no Australian should be discriminated against because of who they are or what they believe. The government is seeking to enhance protections in antidiscrimination law in a way that brings Australians together. In essence, what the government wants to do is to prevent discrimination against people of faith, including vilification protections to protect all students from discrimination on any grounds and to protect teachers from discrimination at work, while maintaining the right of religious schools to preference people of their faith in the selection of staff. It is in the interests of all Australians that there be an enduring solution that strengthens protections for all Australians, including students, teachers and people of faith. That's why bipartisan support is so essential. We want to get this done, we want unity, not division. The Prime Minister has reached out to the Leader of the Opposition to get this done, and I continue to look forward to working with the opposition to progress legislation, if that is possible.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Workplace Relations, Aged Care Workforce</title>
          <page.no>33</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PAYNE</name>
    <name.id>144732</name.id>
    <electorate>Canberra</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Aged Care. How is the Albanese Labor government working to address the chronic undervaluation of gendered work in Australia, including in aged care, and helping Australian women to earn more and keep more of what they earn?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WELLS</name>
    <name.id>264121</name.id>
    <electorate>Lilley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Canberra for her question, after being such a strong advocate for women in this place and in Canberra.</para>
<para>If you've visited an aged care home or an early learning centre, like all of us on this side of the House have, you know that being a carer is one of Australia's hardest jobs. Our carers have dedicated their working lives to supporting our loved ones, from our youngest citizens to our eldest citizens. Caring is physical work, it's emotionally draining work, and it is also highly skilled work. But for far too long these workers—aged-care workers and early educators—have been underpaid and undervalued. That's not because these jobs are not skilled or because these jobs are not important. It is because these jobs are predominantly done by women.</para>
<para>Yesterday's Fair Work Commission decision was a cost-of-living win for workers, but perhaps more importantly, it was a win for Australian women. It was a signal that how this country views their work is changing. The Albanese government understands gender equality and economic reform go hand in hand. There is no greater example of putting this policy into practice than our historic aged-care pay rise. Labor promised and delivered a 15 per cent increase to award wage minimums for 250,000 aged-care workers—an $11.3 billion investment in the people who dedicate their working lives to caring for older Australians. This pay rise isn't just providing aged care workers with economic security, it is changing the system.</para>
<para>I recently heard of an aged-care worker named Donelle, who lives and works in Biloela in the member for Flynn's electorate. Donelle started her aged-care career 20 years ago as an enrolled nurse. She then left and went to work in a hospital and became a registered nurse. While working in hospitals, Donelle felt frustrated and she considered leaving nursing because she felt a huge amount of pressure about how little time she had to spend with her patients. Donelle made a change. She moved north with her husband and two sons. I'm pleased to report that Donelle has now returned to aged care after 20 years and she is thriving. She says that aged care has dramatically changed in the 20 years since she left it. She says now it feels like a family, not like a facility and now it feels people centred rather than institution centred. That is what happens when you invest in the care economy, that is what happens when you invest in Australian women like Donelle. That is what happens when you prioritise a fairer future for all Australians.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Defence Personnel</title>
          <page.no>33</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HASTIE</name>
    <name.id>260805</name.id>
    <electorate>Canning</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. Can the Prime Minister explain the government's policy of watering down the entry requirements for service in the Australian Defence Force?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MARLES</name>
    <name.id>HWQ</name.id>
    <electorate>Corio</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for his question. Today we have announced that, as of 1 July, we will be allowing New Zealand citizens who have been permanent residents of our country for at least a year to join the Defence Force if they pass all the appropriate security checks required for anyone who joins the Defence Force. That is a positive step forward in terms of increasing the pool of available people to join Australia's Defence Force.</para>
<para>This was flagged in the National Defence Strategy, which I announced just over a month ago, which indicated we would be looking to non-Australians to join the Australian Defence Force, with a view to dealing with the question of the recruitment and retention issues that we face within the Australian Defence Force—and not just that, but looking forward to 2040 to put ourselves in a position where we can grow the Australian Defence Force.</para>
<para>We know that, when the Leader of the Opposition was the Minister for Defence, we saw the Australian Defence Force shrink. That is the reality of what we have faced. Since coming to power, we have improved the offer in terms of terms and conditions to those who serve in our nation's Defence Force through a better housing package and through retention bonuses, such that the separation rate in the Defence Force has fallen. And, indeed, in respect of recruitment, we are starting to turn that around as well. But it is an important step to open the door to a broader range of people to join our Defence Force.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Leader of the Opposition, on a point of order?</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MARLES</name>
    <name.id>HWQ</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>That was relevant!</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'll hear the point of order. I don't need assistance from members on my right.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Dutton</name>
    <name.id>00AKI</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It was a very tight question. The minister's advice now is contrary to or at least deficient in its advice compared to the junior minister, who provided a different account of how this would work. It goes well beyond New Zealand citizens, as you well know, and has broader application. Perhaps the minister could provide us with the actual detail.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Once again, for the second time, he's arguing a point that wasn't in the question. I know he may now have further questions to ask regarding the minister's answer. He was asked to explain the policy about entrants to the Australian Defence Force. I'm unaware of any other announcements that have been made, so I can only deal with what he's been asked. If there's subsequent information that the leader is requesting, he'll be able to do that another time. For the time being, at this moment in time, he's being directly relevant. He's talking about the policy, how it happened, why it's happened and the execution of the policy. Under the standing orders, he is being directly relevant.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MARLES</name>
    <name.id>HWQ</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you, Mr Speaker. We are walking down this path and doing so in a careful, slow and calibrated way. As I said, from 1 July, with those conditions in place around having been a permanent resident for a year at least and the appropriate security checks, if you are from New Zealand you will be able to join the Defence Force. From 1 January, that will be extended to other Five Eyes countries. In the future, we are having an eye to the Pacific. That is what we are doing. But what we learned from the question that has been asked by the shadow minister and from the interjection of the Leader of the Opposition now is that there are no bounds that they won't cross in order to run a scare campaign and blow any single whistle that they can find!</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Wages</title>
          <page.no>34</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RAE</name>
    <name.id>300122</name.id>
    <electorate>Hawke</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. How is the Albanese Labor government helping low-paid workers earn more and keep more of what they earn? What response has there been to the government's policies?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
    <electorate>Watson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Hawke. In his electorate, as we count down to 1 July, every single taxpayer is getting a tax cut, and every single award worker is getting a pay rise—every single one of them. Both things happening are what those opposite hate. People are earning more, and people are keeping more of what they earn.</para>
<para>The decision from the Fair Work Commission yesterday, that 3.75 per cent increase, comes on top of increase after increase after increase that happened when the government changed its policy. Those opposite hate it when they're reminded of it being a deliberate design feature to keep wages low. They say, 'Oh, it was only a comment that Mathias made, and he didn't really mean it.' That is the argument that gets put. Apparently the fact that wages completely flatlined was just a coincidence.</para>
<para>Also, they ignore what changed. This was a submission to the first annual wage review that we made a submission to in 2022, but this submission ended up not being taken into account by the Fair Work Commission, because it's the one that they had put forward, which we asked to have withdrawn. And this one had section 7.1—this is a chapter of the submission we decided to not include—called 'The importance of low-paid work'. Those opposite were completely upfront that they wanted people to keep wages low. They did not want the commission to make the orders that it has made. When loopholes arose that allowed the undercutting of wages, they wanted to leave the loopholes open. When we had a gig economy where people had no minimum standards at all, they liked it that way. When you had an enterprise agreement being undercut by labour hire, that was exactly what they wanted to have happen.</para>
<para>Two years of different submissions being made to the rubbish they used to put forward means that, as a result of all of that, full-time retail workers will be seeing $102 a week extra in their bank accounts. Cleaners will be seeing $103 extra in their bank accounts. Hairdressers will see $106 extra in their bank accounts. Aged-care workers will be seeing an extra $200 in their bank accounts. That's what you get as a result of two years of work. They have opposed it every step of the way. It took them their entire 10 years in office to get the minimum wage to move as far as it has moved under the Albanese Labor government in just two years. They want people to work longer for less. Under us, people will earn more and keep more of what they earn.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Albanese</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the <inline font-style="italic">Notice Paper</inline>.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE</title>
        <page.no>35</page.no>
        <type>MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Regional Australia</title>
          <page.no>35</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:11</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 Page proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:</para>
<quote><para class="block">This Government's continued neglect of regional Australia.</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>15:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HOGAN</name>
    <name.id>218019</name.id>
    <electorate>Page</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It is with a bit of sadness that I propose this MPI. Labor, for many years now, whenever they've been in government, have always been in an alliance with the Greens. Now they are in an alliance with the Teals. So we have a Labor-Greens-Teals alliance. What their actions, any decisions they make and the legislation they pass show is that they don't like regional people. They certainly don't like what they do.</para>
<para>Why would I say that? It's because, in this country, in the calendar year of 2023, we exported $650 billion worth of goods and services. I can tell you three-quarters of that, over $400 billion of that, came from rural, regional and remote Australia. I can tell you right now that they don't like what we do. They do not like what people in regional Australia do.</para>
<para>Of the four major things that we sell and the four major things that fund Australia's standard of living, the first one is iron ore. I had the great privilege last year to go to Port Hedland. I was out at a mine for a couple of days. I went and saw the wonderful infrastructure at Port Hedland. It produced over $100 billion for this country last year. Just by coincidence, the cabinet had a meeting that day in Port Hedland. They all flew in, had a meeting at an undisclosed location and flew out. That was their commitment to Port Hedland and the iron ore industry. There was no meeting with the industry, no minesite visit and no trip out on the water to have a look at what happens.</para>
<para>Another one is coal. Coal generates, depending on prices, $100 billion a year to this country. When have you ever heard the Prime Minister or the Treasurer talk about the coal industry? They won't. That's because they represent the inner-city elite. If you look at a map of Australian electorates and you look at the big regional and rural seats, you will see the colour green for my Nationals colleagues and the colour blue for my Liberal colleagues covering vast sections. The vast majority of the map looks green and blue because we represent the people who do this stuff.</para>
<para>The other big export is gas. The best the Treasurer could do was last year in his budget speech. The closest he has ever got to mentioning any of these industries was when he said 'the things that we sell overseas'. He couldn't mention the word 'gas', couldn't mention the word 'coal' and couldn't mention the words 'iron ore'. I've had the great privilege to go to Curtis Island to look at the impacts and investments in Darwin in the Northern Territory—they are funding Australia's life.</para>
<para>I will spend time on this later, but the last area or industry that funds this country's wealth is farming. From that side of the chamber over, you'd think that they'd look at this and go: 'You know what? Thank you for the electorates that you represent,' because we feed you, we clothe you and we make the products that build your houses. But there's no thanks; there's just demonisation from the other side. Unfortunately, it's because there has been a shift in the politics and trends of this country that that side—especially the Greens and the Teals and the Prime Minister—represent the elites. They represent the entitled people, whereas we are representing people who are having a go and creating wealth in this country.</para>
<para>Let's go to our farmers for a moment and go through some examples of what this government has done in this term that have demonised our farmers and regional people, what they do and how they do it. The most obvious one I'll start with is the most recent one, and we saw demonstrations last week—it's the live export industry. The Leader of the Nationals has said this many times in this House: we have the best animal welfare standards in the world, but from that side of the chamber and over, no—they demonise it because of the people they represent: the inner city. Let's go back 12, 13 or 14 years ago, because this has been going on a long time. We had the ABC—I can't remember who compered the program, but it would have been a Laura Tingle clone, as there are lots of them at the ABC—run a <inline font-style="italic">Four Corners</inline> report demonising the live export industry, and then what happened? Within days they shut the industry down because all the inner-city elites said: 'We know the facts; we've just watched the <inline font-style="italic">Four Corners</inline> report. We know how terrible this industry is. We've never seen one and probably have never been to a live export ship, but we know because we watch the ABC and we live in the inner city.' The government back then shut the industry down overnight. What we have seen is just a repetition of that. Besides the great shame of that decision, that was damaging not only to our live exporters but also our beef at the time. That wasn't bad for our farmers; it was exceptionally bad for our international relations. We had key trading partners and key neighbours who relied on that for their protein. But no, that's not important to this lot! It's all about the inner-city elites. It's all about the ABC and the <inline font-style="italic">Guardian</inline>. 'They know everything, we'll listen to them and we'll make our decisions about what this country does and what we can do and what we can't do—even though they don't represent most of the people who do that.</para>
<para>Regional people have worked this lot out. In Perth on Friday, we saw the protests there. My Western Australian colleagues were there. The movement is on and regional Australia have worked out that this lot do not like what they do. Another example I want to give is that in this term of government we have seen the Murray Darling Basin Plan. For all of my colleagues who work and live in this area, the devastation that is going to do—this is actually a pretty weird one, because you have got the inner-city elites who have worked out that the mouth of the Murray River should never close. That's weird in itself, because before we built the weir system you'd have a drought and the mouth would close up all the time, but we now have a weir system and we hold water back. They have now decided to take that money—and do you know who they're taking it from? I know you know. They're taking that water—and that money, effectively—from regional people, from farmers. That would decimate a lot of our farming industry. It's going to decimate a lot of country towns and regional centres. It just shows that this government, with their friends the Teals and the Greens, have no idea about regional Australia nor do they care about our farmers or how we do what we do.</para>
<para>There are other issues. My good friend the member for Gippsland—we saw some of this in the state government as well, but sometimes state Labor can be worse. They have now decided that we can't selectively harvest our own hardwood. So we're going to have a record amount of houses built but we are not going to have our own hardwood. If you talk to people about that, they go: 'Well, it's not good, but we do it very selectively. We do it very environmentally sensitively.' So now we're going to get it from Brazil or Indonesia. Or they're going to go over and ransack the forest there and do it there.</para>
<para>This is another one: marine parks. It's probably more state government related, but I know that the previous federal government, when Labor was in power from 2007 to 2013, had things to do with this. We import over 70 per cent of the fish we eat. That's absurd for an island country with the fishing grounds that we have. Our fishermen know where to fish, they know how to fish and they know how to protect breeding grounds. But, no, in their wisdom Labor governments, state and federal, have decided to shut down fishing. So we now import and eat fish from ravaged fishing grounds in South-East Asian countries. Again, it's just the absurdity: they don't like what we do and they don't like how we do it even though, as I said, we clothe them, we feed them and we make the products that build their houses. But they demonise everything we do. As I said, the Australian public—or the country public—are onto them.</para>
<para>We've seen other examples: another brainwave they had was to bring in a fresh food tax. That was going to be great for our farmers as well. What would it do? That would increase the cost of food. So the brainstorm there was to bring in a fresh food tax and increase the cost of living. Fortunately, we were able to block them on that one.</para>
<para>My time is running out, but I have a lot more to say. I could go through the renewable ransacking they're going to do for the environment. They want to build 28,000 kilometres for a new transmission system, Deputy Speaker. If you could see how that's going to ravage the environment—and I know that the member for Warringah doesn't want wind turbines in her electorate, but, hey, how dare we ever protest against wanting them in our communities!</para>
<para>Again, I'll just say that country people have worked this lot out. I've said it two or three times before: we feed you, we make the products for you to build your homes and we clothe you. Country people know that you don't respect them and they have sussed you lot out.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I will just give a reminder: let's try not to reflect on the Chair in any way during speeches.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms McBAIN</name>
    <name.id>281988</name.id>
    <electorate>Eden-Monaro</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Well, that was a long 10 minutes! My electorate of Eden-Monaro, with the towns of Bombala, Braidwood, Bega Bungendore, Bywong and Binalong, absolutely meet the criteria of inner-city elites—absolutely! It's absolutely outrageous: townships of 200 people—absolutely they meet that criteria! What a load of bluff and bluster that was. If the member were so concerned about regional Australia, those over there only had nearly a decade to do something about it.</para>
<para>The previous Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison government was known for being long on the story but very short on the delivery: all photo-op and no follow-up.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Member for Page!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms McBAIN</name>
    <name.id>281988</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It was nearly a decade which those opposite had to deal with regional doctor shortages, and what did they do? What did they deliver? Nothing. In fact when the now Leader of the Opposition was health minister, he froze Medicare rebates for six years, stripping more than $3.8 billion from the primary healthcare system, impacting regional Australia.</para>
<para>After nearly a decade that they had to deliver extra child care spaces in rural and regional Australia, what did they do? Nothing. In fact, it was widely reported that a bloke in the Liberal-National party suggested that working women using child care was 'outsourcing parenting'. After the nearly a decade that those opposite had to place Australia at the forefront of a global energy transition, they did nothing. To be fair, they did have 22 different energy policies that have never made it past an announcement. And now we have another one. It's only 12 weeks, and I'm waiting for the location of nuclear reactors for a nuclear policy that was announced only 670 days ago—so, according to the timeframes, we still have about eight years to go before we get anywhere. Apart from this load of nothing, the former government will be able to point to their record on sports rorts, carpark rorts and robodebt, or to a prime minister who swore himself into a further five ministerial portfolios—what a record!</para>
<para>When we came to government there was a lot to do, especially in regional Australia. We've made record investment in local roads across the country and we're progressively doubling Roads to Recovery to $1 billion a year. In the next five years the Albanese government will invest a total of $4.4 billion into the Roads to Recovery program. We are increasing road blackspot funding from $110 million to $150 million a year and rolling out our new $200 million Safer Local Roads and Infrastructure Program.</para>
<para>Local councils tell me this additional funding will be a game changer. But don't take my word for it; Councillor Tony Quinn, Mayor of Greater Hume Council, in the electorate of Farrer, wrote to me only yesterday to say thank you for the recent additional allocation under Roads to Recovery of $3,623,769 for his local government area, bringing their total funding to $11,388,908. Greater Hume Council has over 2,000 kilometres of road. Mayor Quinn said, 'This funding from the Australian government is vital to assist in maintaining this network, ensuring that it is safe, accessible and meets the needs of our growing community now and into the future.'</para>
<para>It's not just the good people of Holbrook and surrounds who will benefit. The shire president of Dardanup, in WA, Councillor Tyrrell Gardiner, in the electorate of Forrest, has written to the government to express his sincere gratitude for extra funding. The Shire of Dardanup will get $1,200,805 in additional funding, and Councillor Gardner said he is deeply, deeply appreciative of the Australian government's continued support for road construction and maintenance.</para>
<para>Our budget was absolutely focused on uplifting the regions, improving services to them and securing a future made right here in this country. The regions are front and centre of our $22.7 billion Future Made in Australia plan, a plan that leverages our world-class resources and ensures we can make more things right here in this country. It will grow regional economies and boost employment opportunities. We're investing $7 billion over the next decade to support critical minerals processing in Australia through the new critical minerals production tax incentives, which will stimulate regional jobs—something welcomed by the Nationals and Liberals in WA. What did they say? Libby Mettam, the leader of the WA Liberals, said, 'We will support this measure,' and the Leader of the Nationals in WA, Shane Love, said, 'It is essential not just for Western Australia and not just for Australia but for the Western world to pursue production tax incentives like this.'</para>
<para>We're continuing to respond to the urgent need to support our healthcare workforce with $116.2 million over five years to strengthen and support our health workforce, along with more rural GP training places. That's on top of incentives for doctors and nurses to work in our regions by waiving HECS fees. That's on top of the $3.5 billion incentive to triple the bulk-billing incentive. They are significant investments.</para>
<para>We know housing is critical to building communities and to attracting and retaining the workforces we need. For so many communities in our regions, including my own, housing numbers are already low due to natural disasters, which puts a strain on supply. That's why we have made the biggest investments in housing in over a decade, with $32 billion in housing initiatives—whether that be the $2 billion Social Housing Accelerator Fund, which allows the state and territory governments some flexibility to make sure they can get more homes on the ground for Australians, or the Housing Support Program, which supports local councils and state and territory governments to get the enabling infrastructure in to get more building underway. We've expanded eligibility policies for the regional first home buyers guarantee, and I'm pleased to say this has already supported more than 18,000 people into homeownership in our regions. Minister Catherine King recently announced 40 successful applicants from the Growing Regions Program, which includes—you won't believe it—childcare centres in Loxton, South Australia, in the electorate of Barker, and in Cloncurry, Queensland, in the electorate of Kennedy. We don't just talk about it; we actually deliver on it.</para>
<para>Building homes or childcare centres starts with the need to back vocational training and education, particularly our trades—and it's no secret that tradies are hard to come by at the moment. It's why we're delivering an additional 20,000 fee-free TAFE places in the construction sector, building on the 24,000 fee-free construction sector places already secure today. We've supported over 100,000 regional people into fee-free TAFE already. We've added an additional 300,000 places nationally through to 2026, so we will see that regional number continue to grow. It's part of our $4.1 billion investment over five years to boost vocational education. This has been welcomed by small-business owners because we will support them to bring on the staff that they need to provide the services that we all love. We want regional people to be able to build skills in their own backyard and to continue to work in their local communities. That's on top of delivering 20 additional regional study hubs so people don't have to move hours away from home to study, like so many of us in this chamber had to do and so many in my community had to do.</para>
<para>We're investing significant amounts of dollars into the clean energy transition. There is $600 million in the 2024-25 budget to bolster skills growth and development in clean energy, construction and manufacturing. Opportunities in these sectors, particularly in the net zero future, are something regional people speak about often. Landowners and businesses want to be on the front foot of this, and so do we. That's why we are working with communities and putting them at the centre of our successful transition. This includes $20.7 million to ensure best practice engagement with local communities and landholders as new renewables are installed across the country.</para>
<para>There is absolutely nothing worse than having decisions made for you from Canberra without consultation when something is changed. Those opposite can go away and talk to their communities about this, but so many renewable projects in our communities happened under those opposite with little consultation, with no guidelines and with no guardrails. They happened to communities. Now you're out there whipping up fear like this wasn't happening when you were in government. It's an absolute shame that you're putting politics before getting outcomes for regional landholders. So much of our nation's prosperity is generated in our regions, and we understand how strong our regions are in building a bigger, stronger future for Australia.</para>
<para>We also understand that the pressure has been huge on families across regional Australia, which is why we've been providing support, like access to quality services, including strengthening Medicare and putting in place cost-of-living measures. We know that there is more to do to deliver for regional Australia. We are delivering outcomes for regional Australia which are tangible and which give them benefits, because issuing press releases is not enough to keep regional Australians happy. Delivering for them, including service, is incredibly important.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
    <electorate>Riverina</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I think there's one thing that all of us in this chamber can agree on, and that is that we should be thanking our farmers. We should be saying thank you to our farmers and applauding our farmers for the work they do. It's not easy. I'm sure those regional Labor members would agree with me that farming is a tough caper. It truly is. I'm glad that the regional development minister quoted WA opposition leader Shane Love, the Leader of the Nationals in Western Australia. I've also got a quote that I'd like to read to the federal parliament from one Mr Love, who described the shutdown of the live sheep export industry as a 'very black day for WA'. He said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Minister Watt has furtively slipped unannounced into Western Australia, coming from Beef Week in his home state of Queensland, where he has no doubt been lauding cattle exports, to kill the live sheep export trade in our state.</para></quote>
<para>That is what Mr Love said. He continued, and this is powerful stuff:</para>
<quote><para class="block">It is a gutless move from a belligerent minister who does not care about the impact this announcement will have on families grappling with a dry season, in the middle of seeding.</para></quote>
<para>Imagine what Mr Love is thinking now. That was when the agriculture minister, Senator Watt, slipped into WA. Imagine what he's thinking now that the member for Ballarat, just on Monday, moved the legislation to ban the export of live sheep.</para>
<para>This is a black day for our farmers, not only in Western Australia but indeed right across the nation. I applaud the Western Australian police officer who put a 'Keep the sheep' sticker on his motorbike. Well done to him. That's a brave move. His view is shared by many in that state because they are appalled at the fact that an industry which operates under world's best practice, with world's best animal welfare standards, is being shut down by this government. They tried it with cattle in June 2011. They failed miserably then and they will fail miserably again because people power will rise to the challenge. It is a terrible move. I tell you what, Madam Deputy Speaker, when we take back government, whenever that is, we will reverse that move.</para>
<para>We're talking here about the neglect of regional Australia, and one of the dreadful changes made by this Labor government was to change the distribution priority areas for general practitioners. The distribution priority area classification means GPs can put up their shingle in, say, Newcastle, Wollongong or the Gold Coast and claim that they are in a priority area. What this change has meant is that GPs in regional, rural and, particularly, remote Australia are forced to compete with metropolitan centres, let's call them, for GPs. It's just wrong. Three hundred and twenty-four country towns do not have a doctor; the pharmacist is the only health professional in town. Yet we saw the member for Adelaide, the Minister for Health and Aged Care, being dragged by the nose by our pharmacists to reach a better deal when they signed the latest accord. Had it not been for those white-coat warriors, this government would have ridden roughshod over those pharmacists, those health professionals who were deserted in their hour of need by the Labor government.</para>
<para>The new rules around 24/7 nurses in aged-care centres, whilst I appreciate 24/7 nursing was one of the recommendations of the royal commission, have had a lasting adverse impact on regional aged-care providers, and they are closing down left, right and centre.</para>
<para>Then, of course, we've got the budget papers with the water allocations marked 'NFP', not for publication. Under this subterfuge, the government will not say how much water it's going to buy out of the Murray-Darling Basin, and this is causing alarm and panic within the river communities. The farmers will get a very big Commonwealth cheque and you won't see them for dust. But, let me tell you, the cafes and small businesses right across those river communities will be affected, because they'll have fewer customers and less money running around their economy. And this is at a time when businesses are going bust in New South Wales at a record level. Business insolvencies in New South Wales are up 61 per cent year on year on Labor's watch.</para>
<para>Labor are not protecting and preserving our regional Australians. Shame on you lot!</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CHESTERS</name>
    <name.id>249710</name.id>
    <electorate>Bendigo</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Madam Deputy Speaker, allow me to set the record straight on a few statements. This MPI can only be described as an absolute furphy and a complete distraction from the real story of what is going on in regional Australia.</para>
<para>I will start with tax cuts, because they are something that those opposite continue to ignore. Their stage 3 tax cuts would have benefited the highest income earners, meaning those on the lowest income, people earning the smallest amount, would have missed out on a tax cut altogether. That was their plan. As we know, many people living in regional Australia earn less. In regional Australia people are lower income earners by the nature of the work they do. Tax cuts are one measure that this government has introduced whereby all Australian taxpayers, including those in regional Australia, will get a tax cut and disproportionately those in outer metro suburbs and our regions will do better. Just like women will do better and younger workers will do better, regional workers will do better because they earn less. Under those opposite they would have got no tax cut; under us they'll get one.</para>
<para>Another change this government has introduced is the tripling of the Medicare incentive. The electorate that will do best under this tripling of the Medicare incentive—my own electorate will do really well, but I don't get to claim the top prize—is the member for Mayo's electorate, a regional electorate. What I mean by that is that more doctors are bulk-billing because of the tripling of the incentive.</para>
<para>There are the changes to the social security safety net. We've heard time and time again from those opposite that they represent some of the poorest electorates, and it is true that they have a higher proportion of people who are pensioners, who are on a Newstart, who receive rent assistance or who are single parents. These are all measures that we have improved since coming to government. There are also back-to-back increases to rent assistance and making sure we fairly index pensioners. Those opposite say that it's a budget blowout to index our pensions properly. There have been increases to Newstart. Electorates like Hinkler, Durack, Mallee, Braddon, Grey and New England, represented by those opposite, have more people receiving those benefit from us and doing better under our government—not under their government, under our government—because we understand and we represent communities that are disadvantaged. They are not just in the regions but also in the outer metro areas.</para>
<para>They try to claim that they represent all poor people. They don't. There is disadvantage in most electorates. We understand that because we represent the regions and the rural areas, as well as the outer metros and the cities. It is so disappointing that those opposite continue to throw up old rhetoric like 'inner-city elites'. It is just shameful that they try to wedge us that way, because it is just not true.</para>
<para>I do like the way they keep bringing up this issue of live sheep exports from WA. Those sheep are being trucked across the Nullarbor into electorates like mine, and spare land is being turned into sheep farms. Can I tell you the net result of that? We're having more sheep processed in abattoirs in my electorate, which is bringing the price of lamb down, so rural people, like all consumers of lamb, are now paying a fairer price for lamb. Lamb became superexpensive. Pensioners weren't buying lamb. But now, because of what has happened—it's the side of the story you don't want to talk about. We are seeing the price of lamb come down, and that is helping people.</para>
<para>When we talk about 'all regional Australians' or 'all rural Australians', you have to think past the rhetoric. It's not just about mining companies and big farm corporations; it's about the communities and the people that live in them: the pensioners, the workers, the self-funded retirees, the people who are struggling. Our government is delivering for them through the measures that I've mentioned and through measures that others on this side will mention. There are the changes to housing, the changes that we're bringing forward to help people. We are a government that cares. We are a government that understands because we represent regional Australia.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr WEBSTER</name>
    <name.id>281688</name.id>
    <electorate>Mallee</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>As I travel around my electorate and I meet constituents face to face, it is becoming more and more apparent that they feel they are being treated as second-class citizens. It is a shame on this government that they feel like they just don't matter, whether it's farmers, farming communities, people running small businesses or mothers who can't get child care—because there is a desert out there; it's called a childcare desert, and not a penny is being spent to deal with this issue. It is a crying shame, and those who are in the cities ought to be aware of just how much—as my good colleagues have been talking about—we actually contribute to the economy.</para>
<para>We on this side of the chamber are not surprised. In fact, we in the Nationals know Labor robs regions to buy votes in the cities. Labor has abolished through the forward estimates the very successful Building Better Regions Fund, the Community Development Fund, the Stronger Communities Program, Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program, Roads of National Significance, the Regional Accelerator Program—do I need to go on? Yes, I do—the Regionalisation Fund and the Energy Security and Regional Development Plan. I might add that last month's budget gave the Mobile Black Spot Program a two-year death sentence as well.</para>
<para>Labor's Growing Regions Program, which they claimed would replace Building Better Regions alongside the Regional Partnerships and Precincts Program, has been so delayed that it has now been two years since regional communities received a cent under the equivalent region-building programs. In my own electorate, only one Growing Regions application has been successful—one program for 83½ thousand square kilometres. It was $5 million for the Swan Hill riverfront. I don't begrudge them that, but what about the other 11 councils? Swan Hill also received $650,000 under the Regional Partnerships and Precincts Program. I would like to be able to say that other councils in my electorate received some funds as well. They deserved it. All 12 councils deserved funding. Did they get it? No, they did not, and there is no promise that funding is coming. Under the Growing Regions Program, Labor rejected 90 per cent of the applications, despite the department deeming 300 of the 380 applicants as being suitable for funding. Only 40 projects were funded and, damningly, $94 million from the Growing Regions Program round 1 was left unallocated. Who does that?</para>
<para>At a Victorian level, the Andrews and now Allan Labor government axed the Regional Jobs and Infrastructure Fund of more than $100 million per year, stranding shires and councils in electorates like mine that relied on joint state and federal funding to get projects off the ground. Under Minister King, Labor have changed the funding requirements, requiring a greater proponent contribution. Mallee shires simply cannot commit that money without a Victorian government funding partner. Remember the 90-day infrastructure review? Minister King's review ran for over 200 days in the end, further delaying the rollout of infrastructure, like upgrades to the Calder Highway, the Murray Valley Highway, the Sunraysia Highway and the Western Highway and the long overdue replacement of the Swan Hill Bridge.</para>
<para>Our roads in Mallee are abysmal. I drive them regularly. At least my car has decent suspension, but the experience is still literally painful. Constituents tell me they are having to repair their cars due to the many potholes that Labor have not lifted one little pinky to fix. It's worse than abysmal; it's downright dangerous and it's threatening lives. That's what a combination of nine years of Victorian Labor and two years of federal Labor and a scorched earth approach to regional Australia does to you. It should be criminal. Regional Australians drive on dangerously damaged roads, and shires have also been stranded by Labor's promise to increase their funding. That can wasn't just kicked down the road; it was kicked into a pothole called a 'local government sustainability review', which is yet to report and, unless we have an early 2025-26 federal budget, won't see more funding during the life of this 47th Parliament. It is a shame.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BRIAN MITCHELL</name>
    <name.id>129164</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyons</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This MPI is abysmal in every way because it is built on a foundation of lies. The fact is that those opposite love to foment division in this place. One of the ugly truths of what they do and their politics is this nasty little comment that they use about so-called inner-city elites. I've just done a little bit of research. Let's look at the so-called elite—somebody with a Bachelor of Economics, who had a career in finance, who worked for the money markets, who worked for Colonial State Bank for 10 years, who has a Graduate Diploma in Education, who taught business studies and commerce, who was a director of a local super fund and who was at the centre of power in this country for 10 years. That's the member for Page, who stood at the dispatch box just now and talked about elites. He is one of the most elite people in this place. Don't get me wrong; I think it's fantastic. It's fantastic that the member for Page has a Bachelor of Economics. It's fantastic he went and got a Graduate Diploma in Education. But don't come in here and deride other people for having professional abilities. Don't make yourself out to be a man of the earth. It's absolutely disgraceful.</para>
<para>The people on this side of the House have the great honour and privilege of representing Newcastle, Bendigo, Ballarat, Bellarine, Queanbeyan, Townsville, Maitland, Ipswich, the Somerset region and Gosford, amongst other places. Fully one-third of Australians live in the regions, and those of us on this side of the House have the great honour and privilege of representing those people as well. It really does cause me great distress when those opposite make this false allegation that they are somehow the arbiters of regional Australia and those on this side are not. It is disgraceful and it should stop.</para>
<para>The other point about this MPI is that it is just based, as I say, on lies. The facts speak differently. The Albanese Labor government is committed to working on regions and funding. We are doubling the Roads to Recovery funding from $500 million to $1 billion per year. We're increasing road black spot funding from $110 million to $150 million per year. We're merging the Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity Program and the Bridges Renewal Program into a new $200 million Safer Local Roads and Infrastructure Program. That's a $50 million increase. We're delivering $250 million more to phase 4 of the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program. With the Growing Regions Program, our government is investing $600 million over three years into regional and rural Australia, including $11 million in Tasmania. There is a whole list of others.</para>
<para>The member for Bendigo made the excellent point that, on 1 July, every single Australian taxpayer is getting a tax cut, and that includes every taxpayer in regional Australia. It particularly includes those many taxpayers in regional Australia who earn under $45,000 a year, because proportionally there are more people in regional Australia earning under $45,000 a year than there are in the cities. So regional Australians do better with those tax cuts that a Labor government is delivering and that those opposite wanted to deny. Those opposite wished to deny those tax cuts to regional Australians.</para>
<para>We are also delivering energy bill relief of $300 for every single Australian household, including for regional Australians. More than half of the Medicare urgent care clinics we have opened in this country have opened in regional Australia. We have got 100,000 people in the regions going through fee-free TAFE. We've got 20 more regional university study hubs. We've got $7 billion over 10 years for critical minerals processing, stimulating regional jobs. We've got $8 million over 10 years for the hydrogen production tax incentive—regional jobs. We've got $835 million over 10 years to grow Australian solar manufacturing—regional jobs. We've got $7 billion over four years on Snowy Hydro. We've got $3½ billion to triple bulk-billing incentives, with many of those benefits in regional Australia.</para>
<para>This government has regional Australia at the centre of our thinking. We are the party that represents the shopkeepers, the supermarket workers and the fast-food workers who live and work in regional Australia and who were all let go and forgotten by those opposite in 10 long years of Liberal-National government.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILLCOX</name>
    <name.id>286535</name.id>
    <electorate>Dawson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's a known fact that everybody in Australia is worse off under the Albanese Labor government, and those in the regions are a lot worse off. Those opposite probably don't even know where the regions are. They're the big bits that are outside the city. That's where the food and fibre come from. They don't come from the supermarket. They don't come from Coles or Woolworths. The regions are where your fruit and veggies, your milk and your meat come from—out of the regions, not just out of the big supermarkets.</para>
<para>The regions are also where all the minerals come from, where the coal comes from—one of our biggest exports. That's where our iron ore—the biggest export in the country—comes from. Our gas comes from the regions. That's why all we ask in rural and regional Australia is to get a little bit of money from the government back to look after rural and regional Australia. What about this week? We've just had the announcement of the closing down of the sheep trade. The closing down of the sheep trade is a flocking insult. It shows that the Albanese Labor government has no idea what the flock is going on.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>You're skating pretty close to the water there. If you intend to be unparliamentary, I will absolutely pull you up.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILLCOX</name>
    <name.id>286535</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you for your guidance, Deputy Speaker. The flock is a group of sheep, and that's what I'm trying to educate those opposite—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I think we all know where you were going, Member for Dawson. Just keep it out of here.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILLCOX</name>
    <name.id>286535</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you very much, Deputy Speaker. I'll take your guidance. I appreciate your guidance.</para>
<para>We're going to see fourth, fifth and sixth generations of farmers have to walk off their land. They're going out of business. But this whole decision hasn't been made on science; it has been made on political science. It has been made by those opposite to make sure that they keep their Greens coalition safe and make sure that they can look after their inner-city voters. But the neglect continues. Look at the fishing industry and the ban of gillnets. That was by those opposite and was supposed to save the Great Barrier Reef—a gillnet doesn't go within 50 miles of the Great Barrier Reef—but it's totally killing our fishing industry. And it's not only our fishing industry, but all the chandleries, the ice-makers, the net builders, the people who do the floats and the anchors, and the boatbuilders. The flow-on effects through rural and regional Australia are absolutely enormous.</para>
<para>The latest brainwave—the family car and ute tax—where they guillotined the debate. You didn't even want to hear from us and you didn't even want to hear from our people. Most people in my area drive a four-wheel drive—they have a Land Cruiser, a ute, a Ford Ranger or something like that. It's what we actually need. But, no, those opposite want to steer everyone into electric vehicles. Listen to this: electric vehicles can't carry the weight, they can't tow the loads and they can't cover the distance. They're just not practical for rural and regional Australia. Again, this is just another attack on the people out in rural and regional Australia. You're taxing them out of existence.</para>
<para>What about the utes for our tradies? Tradies are flat out affording a ute now, so when they have to pay this extra money for a ute they're going to have to put that on the bill. Once again, those opposite are driving up our cost of living.</para>
<para>Then there's the Bruce Highway. Have a look at the Bruce Highway in my electorate. It's how farmers get their product to market and their supplies up from the city. There's no money for the Bruce Highway. There was half a billion dollars from the coalition, but nothing there.</para>
<para>This reckless race to renewables that Labor seems to be prosecuting at every opportunity is really hurting rural and regional Australia. You're taking out all the good quality agricultural land and putting solar panels on it, wiping out tops of hills, native vegetation and koala habitats so you can put swindle factories in—the big fans that only work about 20 per cent of the time anyway. They don't work when the wind is too short and they can't work when there's too much. This is really bad. It's about time Labor stepped up and started to look after rural and regional Australia.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ROB MITCHELL</name>
    <name.id>M3E</name.id>
    <electorate>McEwen</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>There's an old saying that's used a lot in the country when you hear something like that—'You've clearly been drinking the water downstream from the herd.' In other words, it's full of nutrition. It's just a rambling mess of untruths and factless stories that get told. And all these scare campaigns amount to nothing.</para>
<para>I know the National Party are a bit like goldfish, with a four-second memory, but let's remember that prior to May 2022 they were in government for 10 years. The National Party, which was once the party of farmers but is now the party of what's under the earth, have walked away from farmers for decades. As far as they're concerned, the only thing that farming land is good for is digging the minerals out from underneath it. They've run away from everything they stood for, which is what you'd expect when they're only averaging around 3.6 per cent of the national vote. But they expect to control things. They attack the Greens, but the National Party can't even get a quarter of the Greens' vote. They're absolutely useless.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ROB MITCHELL</name>
    <name.id>M3E</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I love the member for Riverina, but from Deputy Minister to second fiddle to the member for Page—that's an absolutely steep drop.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCormack</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It's an office you'll never hold. Trust me.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ROB MITCHELL</name>
    <name.id>M3E</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I know, but it's an office that I haven't tried to get. One good thing is you can't fail. But you did. Let's go through and have a talk—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Let's direct our comments through the chair and lay down the personal insults.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ROB MITCHELL</name>
    <name.id>M3E</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The fact of the matter is that the Nationals have some of the poorest electorates in the country. This is not new; this has been happening for decades. It's been happening for decades because it's always the National Party that leave their electorates behind. The reason they have poor education, low incomes and all the other job opportunity failures is that there's one consistency—National Party representation causes that. We heard before the absolute rubbish that was spewed out about what we did with the district workforce shortage stuff in relation to doctors. Well, none of them would know, but there are places like Kyneton, Woodend, Gisborne and the Mitchell shire, which is now half-represented by the absent member for Nicholls. That lot changed the doctors rating to 1, which treated rural communities the same as Brighton, which is where old Bridget used to live. So you've got to sit there and say, 'How can you come in here and attack us, when more money gets invested in rural and regional committees under our government than ever is under your government?' It was your lot that changed the doctors rating to make rural and regional towns the same as inner city.</para>
<para>Now, let's have a think about what they did when they were in government. The Inland Rail is four years behind, $15 billion over budget and getting nowhere. It's just an absolute joke that they come in here and waste our time, and waste the parliament's time. You'd think that they might actually be standing up for farmers. That's what it's about. You'd think that the leadership would have all the knowledge and the wisdom of farmers, but I think the only time the leadership over there ever went on a farm was to foreclose, because that's what they do. They just come in here and waste time. They don't talk about the positive things or how we can actually build to make things better.</para>
<para>In 10 years of government, they couldn't get a thing done, yet in our first budget we delivered $15 million to the hub in Seymour, for which the member for Nicholls was quite happy to get out of his box, make his first trip to Seymour and say, 'Look at that! Isn't that great?' But he never apologised to the community for waiting nine years to actually get that done, because it took a Labor government to do it. The Macedon Ranges Regional Sports Precinct covers a big area that takes in all the Macedon Ranges and surrounding areas. It gets all the kids and all the people together for sports. For nine years it was asked for, and each year it was knocked back by those opposite. We got into government and we funded it straightaway. And, now, what do we see? We see these magnificent facilities in regional Victoria that are actually delivering benefits for kids and their families.</para>
<para>If you want to talk about road funding, I'd be happy to talk about that for days. Let's talk about the $50 million for the Watson Street interchange, which was promised to be delivered after the member for Riverina and I went to a tragic event in my electorate. Fortunately, he wasn't still there, but his replacement then took that money away. And when they promised to put $50 million into the Hume Highway, what did they do with that? They took that away as well. So the only constancy you have with the National Party, if you vote for them, is that they will take away from regional communities just look after themselves.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WALLACE</name>
    <name.id>265967</name.id>
    <electorate>Fisher</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on this motion as a rural or regional member of parliament from the Sunshine Coast. Members opposite—in fact, the infrastructure minister—announced a 90-day review in relation to infrastructure.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Caldwell</name>
    <name.id>306489</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Has that been finished?</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WALLACE</name>
    <name.id>265967</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It's finished now. It took something like six months to get the outcome, but that's what members do on that side of the House. Those opposite, the government, are continuously crowing about housing and how they are going to fix the housing problem, but let me just run this little ditty by you. When the results finally came out about the 90-day review, the government cut a project, the upgrade to the Mooloolah River interchange, that we funded when we were in government. This is $160 million that the former federal government promised to meet the state government on—the hopeless Labor state government—in Queensland. We offered to pay 50 per cent of the first stage. It would've been when you were Deputy Prime Minister, Member for Riverina.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCormack</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The golden age!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WALLACE</name>
    <name.id>265967</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The golden age. We offered $160 million. That was scrapped altogether as a result of the 90-day review. It was scrapped, gone. But guess what? Not only is this the Sunshine Coast's most dangerous intersection, where you've got lanes coming in all over the place and merging—it is a really dangerous intersection—but we offered to fix it. We offered to pay half of it. They scrapped it. But it gets worse, because the state government—same party—about a week after the announcement was made to withdraw $160 million, sent the bulldozers in and demolished 100 houses in the middle of the worst housing crisis that I have seen in my 56 years. They bulldozed 100 houses to make way for an Mooloolah River interchange upgrade that now is not going to happen. Can anybody explain to me the wisdom of governments where the federal government not only cut that $160 million but also, the very next week, sent the bulldozers in to demolish houses? Those people, those families that lived in those houses, would have been dislocated on the Sunshine Coast, because trying to find a house on the Sunshine Coast is like to find a needle in a haystack. It's almost impossible.</para>
<para>I'll give you another example: the $7 million that we contributed to Third Avenue access into Caloundra—cut through the 90 day review. That wouldn't be a rounding error for the federal government, and yet Labor cut it. It just makes no sense. The railway line that we committed to when we were in government from Beerwah to Maroochydore—this government and the state Labor government have cut it into a third. We are getting a third of the railway line for twice the price. That's what's happening to infrastructure under this federal government.</para>
<para>Finally, just to top off why this Labor government has no concept about regions, I had a ginger grower ask me to come to his farm the other day—a ginger grower in the Glass House Mountains, Jacques is his name—and he was telling me about the biosecurity tax that those members opposite wanted to introduce to require local growers to pay a tax on the protection of bringing other goods into this country. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SWANSON</name>
    <name.id>264170</name.id>
    <electorate>Paterson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Albanese Labor government is delivering for all Australians, whether you're a taxpayer, a pensioner or a self-funded retiree, whether you live in a city, a suburb, on a back road or a busy road. Speaking of roads, there is so much roadwork going on in Australia at the moment. In fact, in my own seat, and in Hunter more broadly, we are spending a record amount—over $3 billion on roads.</para>
<para>I have been speaking about the incredibly important M1 extension Raymond Terrace bypass since I was elected in 2016. I couldn't be prouder to be part of a government that is delivering this. My neighbouring electorate, the city of Newcastle, is so pleased to be getting a bypass that's finally getting some work done. As you drive around the Hunter region, you can't help but see roadworks. And I know at the moment it is frustrating—we all want the roadworks to be finished and completed—but they are under way. And let me tell you, it is much better to be having delay and disruption than delay and denial, which is what we had for the previous 10 years. The coalition government didn't want a bar of this roadwork. Finally, we have been elected, and together with the state government—and it's a great example of the state and Commonwealth governments working together—we are delivering. We are building that M1 extension. It won't only benefit people in my electorate and the Hunter region more broadly—we're magnanimous in the Hunter, and we're helping to help everyone!</para>
<para>It's going to help the 'city elites', as the coalition keep referring to them as. They are good people—I don't think they're elite; they just live in a city—and often they want to leave the city. They want to drive through my electorate to go to beautiful places like Port Stephens, which is still in my electorate. At the moment, they have to stop at a set of traffic lights, go over a flyover, then go over another flyover, turn left, turn right and sit in hours of traffic. Well, we are building a new road to fix that. It is because we are responsible government that not only has been able to deliver a tax cut for every single Australian taxpayer but also has been able to deliver roadworks.</para>
<para>This week, we have been able to sign a deal with our pharmacists that ensures cheaper medicines for every single Australian. That is really important to the people where I live as well. We do not distinguish between city and bush; we want all Australians to do well. All Australians are going to receive the energy rebate. We know that it is so important to deliver in government.</para>
<para>I think this is where the coalition have missed the mark. They had 10 years to deliver for the Australian people. They had their opportunity. Sadly, they found it very difficult to land an environment policy. Defence ministers—well, there were a good number of those. So, in terms of talking about the security of the Australian people, I think there were some gaping holes there. We are a government that is hellbent on delivering, and we're going to keep doing that.</para>
<para>We're going to keep doing it through things like incentives for a doctor to bulk-bill. I want to give a big shout out to Dr Chris Boyle at the Raymond Terrace Family Practice. He is working so hard, as he has done for 40 years at that practice alone, helping the families of Raymond Terrace be well and feel good about their health. This is where good government really comes into focus. We can come into this place and talk about all of the achievements that we want to have, but when you actually speak to people who have been serving their community you might hear them say: 'I am happy to keep doing this job. I love it. I just want a hand.' That's what this government is doing.</para>
<para>We are delivering for people who are not earning a lot of money and who want a wage rise. They received that this week: 3.75 per cent, thank you very much, from the Fair Work Commission. They're going to get a tax cut from 1 July. These are the things that people in Australia really care about. This is what they look to their government to deliver for them. This government is not just making empty promises. Every day, hard-working ministers and the Prime Minister get out of bed and make a difference for Australia. I'm proud to be a part of this.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Time has now expired. Thank you.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>44</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Net Zero Economy Authority Bill 2024</title>
          <page.no>44</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="r7177" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Net Zero Economy Authority Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>44</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In accordance with standing order 133(b), I shall now proceed to put the question on the motion moved by the Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister and the Assistant Minister for the Public Service for the second reading of the Net Zero Economy Authority Bill 2024, on which a division was called for and deferred in accordance with standing orders. No further debate is allowed.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question before the House is that the Net Zero Economy Authority Bill 2024 be read a second time.</para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [16:17] <br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>88</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>Burke, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Burnell, M. P.</name>
                  <name>Burney, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Burns, J.</name>
                  <name>Butler, M. C.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Chalmers, J. E.</name>
                  <name>Chandler-Mather, M.</name>
                  <name>Chaney, K. E.</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>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>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>Le, D.</name>
                  <name>Leigh, A. K.</name>
                  <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                  <name>Marles, R. D.</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>Plibersek, T. J.</name>
                  <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                  <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Rishworth, A. L.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Rowland, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</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. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M.</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>53</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Andrews, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Archer, B. K.</name>
                  <name>Bell, A. M.</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>Coulton, M. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Dutton, P. C.</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>Kennedy, S. P.</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>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>Wood, J. P.</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.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Consideration in Detail</title>
            <page.no>45</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GORMAN</name>
    <name.id>74519</name.id>
    <electorate>Perth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present a supplementary explanatory memorandum to the bill and ask leave of the House to move government amendments (1) to (23), as circulated, together.</para>
<para>Leave granted.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GORMAN</name>
    <name.id>74519</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Clause 6, page 11 (lines 4 to 19), omit subclause (4), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) An employer is also a <inline font-style="italic">dependent employer</inline> if:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the employer (the <inline font-style="italic">relevant employer</inline>) is a constitutional corporation; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the relevant employer:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) has a commercial relationship with another constitutional corporation that operates (whether alone or jointly) a coal mine; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) has a commercial relationship with an associated entity of another constitutional corporation, where the other constitutional corporation operates (whether alone or jointly) a coal mine; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iii) is an associated entity of another constitutional corporation, where the other constitutional corporation operates (whether alone or jointly) a coal mine;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">where:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iv) the coal from the coal mine is being, or is to be, supplied to a closing employer for use in generating electricity at the coal-fired power station concerned; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(v) the other constitutional corporation will, or will be likely to, cease a substantial part of the business operations carried on by the other constitutional corporation in the same geographic area in which the coal-fired power station concerned is located as a direct result of the eventual closure of that power station; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the relevant employer employs employees to perform work in the business operations carried on at the coal mine.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Clause 54, page 41, (lines 15 to 17), omit "If an employer contravenes a civil penalty provision, a court may order the payment of a civil penalty under the Regulatory Powers Act.", substitute "If an employer contravenes a civil penalty provision, a court may order the payment of a civil penalty under the Regulatory Powers Act and may order the awarding of compensation for loss that a person has suffered because of the contravention.".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Clause 54, page 41 (after line 17), at the end of the clause, add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">A court can grant an injunction restraining a person from contravening a provision of this Part or requiring a person to comply with a provision of this Part.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) Clause 55, page 43 (lines 8 to 10), omit subclause (5), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) As part of the community of interest process, the CEO must consult:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) employers covered by paragraph (1)(a); and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) employers covered by paragraph (1)(b); and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) each employer organisation that is entitled to represent the industrial interests of an employer covered by paragraph (1)(a) or (b).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) Clause 56, page 44 (line 27), after "employment", insert ", including supports provided under relevant enterprise agreements or other industrial instruments".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) Clause 57, page 47 (line 2), after "employment", insert ", including supports provided under relevant enterprise agreements or other industrial instruments".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(7) Clause 58, page 49 (after line 10), after paragraph (1)(b), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ba) inform each transition employee of the employer that, if the employee becomes a participating employee of the employer, personal information about the employee may be given to the CEO under section 64 or disclosed by the CEO under section 66; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(8) Clause 58, page 49 (after line 13), at the end of subclause (1), add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note: Australian Privacy Principle 6 in Schedule 1 to the <inline font-style="italic">Privacy Act 1988 </inline>has the effect that, if a closing employer or dependent employer is an APP entity (within the meaning of that Act) and holds personal information about a transition employee that was collected for a particular purpose, the employer must not use or disclose the information for another purpose unless:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the employee has consented to the use or disclosure of the information; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the use or disclosure of the information is required or authorised by or under an Australian law or a court/tribunal order; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) that use or disclosure is otherwise authorised by that Principle.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(9) Clause 58, page 49 (line 14), omit "Paragraphs (1)(a) and (b)", substitute "Paragraphs (1)(a), (b) and (ba)".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(10) Clause 59, page 49 (line 29), at the end of paragraph (1)(c), add ", including supports provided under those agreements or instruments".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(11) Clause 59, page 51 (after line 6), after subclause (9), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Reasonable notice for time off work or access to flexible working arrangements</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(9A) In any request of a transition employee of a closing employer or dependent employer for time off work, or access to flexible working arrangements, to receive career planning advice or financial advice arranged by the employee, the employee must give the employer reasonable notice of wanting that time off work or that access to flexible working arrangements.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(9B) In any request of a participating employee of a closing employer or dependent employer for time off work, or access to flexible working arrangements, to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) undertake training to assist the employee to find other employment; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) attend activities relating to the recruitment of the employee;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">the employee must give the employer reasonable notice of wanting that time off work or that access to flexible working arrangements.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Evidence</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(9C) If a closing employer or dependent employer has allowed a transition employee of the employer time off work, or access to flexible working arrangements, to receive career planning advice or financial advice arranged by the employee, the employee must, if required by the employer, give the employer evidence that would satisfy a reasonable person that the employee used the time off work or flexible working arrangements to receive that advice.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(9D) Before a closing employer or dependent employer makes a financial contribution towards the costs of career planning advice or financial advice arranged by a transition employee of the employer, the employee must, if required by the employer, give the employer evidence that would satisfy a reasonable person of the total cost of the advice.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(9E) If a closing employer or dependent employer has allowed a participating employee of the employer time off work, or access to flexible working arrangements, to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) undertake training to assist the employee to find other employment; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) attend activities relating to the recruitment of the employee;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">the employee must, if required by the employer, give the employer evidence that would satisfy a reasonable person that the employee used the time off work or flexible working arrangements to undertake the training or to attend the activities.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(9F) Before a closing employer or dependent employer makes a financial contribution towards the costs of training to assist a participating employee of the employer to find other employment, the employee must, if required by the employer, give the employer evidence that would satisfy a reasonable person of the total cost of the training.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(12) Clause 60, page 52 (after line 34), at the end of subclause (5), add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note: See section 61A for the dealing with disputes.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(13) Clause 61, page 55 (after line 32), at the end of subclause (5), add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note: See section 61A for the dealing with disputes.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(14) Clause 61, page 56 (line 5), after "following conduct", insert ", including conduct to comply with obligations under relevant enterprise agreements or other industrial instruments,".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(15) Page 57 (after line 23), after clause 61, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">61A Dealing with disputes</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Disputes dealt with by the Fair Work Commission</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) If:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) a term referred to in paragraph 60(5)(d) or 61(5)(d) requires or allows the Fair Work Commission to deal with a dispute about any matter arising under a determination under subsection 60(5) or 61(5); and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) such a dispute arises; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) a party to the dispute applies to the Fair Work Commission to deal with the dispute;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">the Fair Work Commission may deal with the dispute.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) In dealing with the dispute, the Fair Work Commission must not exercise any powers limited by the term referred to in paragraph 60(5)(d) or 61(5)(d) (as the case requires).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) If, in accordance with that term, the parties to the dispute have agreed that the Fair Work Commission may arbitrate (however described) the dispute, the Fair Work Commission may do so.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) Division 3 of Part 5-1 of the <inline font-style="italic">Fair Work Act 2009</inline> applies in relation to the Fair Work Commission dealing with the dispute in a corresponding way to the way in which that Division applies in relation to the dealing with a dispute covered by subsection 595(1) of that Act.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Disputes dealt with by persons other than the Fair Work Commission</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) If a term referred to in paragraph 60(5)(d) or 61(5)(d) requires or allows a person other than the Fair Work Commission to deal with a dispute about any matter arising under a determination under subsection 60(5) or 61(5):</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the person, in dealing with the dispute, must not exercise any powers limited by the term; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) if, in accordance with the term, the parties to the dispute have agreed that the person may arbitrate (however described) the dispute—the person may do so.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(16) Clause 62, page 59 (line 5), after "following conduct", insert ", including conduct to comply with obligations under relevant enterprise agreements or other industrial instruments,".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(17) Clause 64, page 63 (lines 4 and 5), omit ", within the period and in the manner specified in the notice,".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(18) Clause 64, page 63 (lines 18 and 19), omit subclause (3), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) The employer must give the information or produce the documents:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) in the manner specified in the notice under subsection (1); and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) before the end of the following period:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) the period specified in the notice (which must end at least 14 days after the day the notice is given), unless subparagraph (ii) applies;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) if the CEO allows a longer period—that longer period.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(19) Clause 64, page 63 (line 31), omit paragraph (5)(b), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the employer fails to give the information or produce the documents in accordance with this section.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(20) Clause 67, page 66 (line 28), at the end of subclause (4), add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">; (c) a court of a State or Territory that has jurisdiction in relation to the matter.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(21) Clause 67, page 66 (after line 28), at the end of the clause, add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Pecuniary penalty orders</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) Subsection 82(1) of the Regulatory Powers Act, to the extent that Part 4 of that Act relates to this Part, has effect as if an application made under that subsection were an application for an order that a person, who is alleged to have contravened a civil penalty provision, pay a pecuniary penalty.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) In relation to an application under subsection 82(1) of the Regulatory Powers Act, to the extent that Part 4 of that Act relates to this Part, if a court is satisfied that a person has contravened a civil penalty provision of this Act, then, despite subsection 82(3) of that Act, the court is empowered under subsection 82(3) of that Act to make an order:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) that the person pay a pecuniary penalty; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) that the pecuniary penalty, or a part of the pecuniary penalty, be paid to the Commonwealth, a particular organisation (within the meaning of the <inline font-style="italic">Fair Work Act 2009</inline>) or a particular person.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(7) To the extent that the court orders that the pecuniary penalty, or a part of the pecuniary penalty, be paid to the Commonwealth, section 83 of the Regulatory Powers Act applies to the pecuniary penalty or the part of the pecuniary penalty.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(8) To the extent that the court orders that the pecuniary penalty, or a part of the pecuniary penalty, be paid to a particular organisation (within the meaning of the <inline font-style="italic">Fair Work Act 2009</inline>) or a particular person, the pecuniary penalty, or the part of the pecuniary penalty, may be recovered as a debt due to the organisation or person.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(22) Page 66 (after line 28), at the end of Division 6, add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">67A Compensation orders</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">In addition to the powers that a court has under Part 4 of the Regulatory Powers Act, to the extent that Part relates to this Part, the court may, if it is satisfied that a person has contravened a civil penalty provision of this Act, make an order under this section awarding compensation for loss that a person has suffered because of the contravention.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(23) Page 67 (before line 1), before Division 7, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Division 6A — Injunctions</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">67B Injunctions</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Enforceable provisions</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) The provisions of this Part are enforceable under Part 7 of the Regulatory Powers Act.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note: Part 7 of the Regulatory Powers Act creates a framework for using injunctions to enforce provisions.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Authorised person</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) For the purposes of Part 7 of the Regulatory Powers Act, the CEO is an authorised person in relation to the provisions mentioned in subsection (1).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) For the purposes of Part 7 of the Regulatory Powers Act, each of the following is also an authorised person in relation to subsection 60(7), 61(9) or 62(9):</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) a person that is an employee organisation that is entitled to represent the industrial interests of one or more of the transition employees of the closing employer or dependent employer that is alleged to have contravened that subsection;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) a transition employee of that closing employer or dependent employer.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Relevant court</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) For the purposes of Part 7 of the Regulatory Powers Act, each of the following courts is a relevant court in relation to the provisions mentioned in subsection (1):</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the Federal Court of Australia;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2);</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) a court of a State or Territory that has jurisdiction in relation to the matter.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Division 6B — Costs</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">67C Costs</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) A person (the <inline font-style="italic">first person</inline>) must bear the person's own costs in relation to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) an application under subsection 82(1) of the Regulatory Powers Act, to the extent that Part 4 of that Act relates to this Part; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) an application under subsection 121(1) or (2) of the Regulatory Powers Act, to the extent that Part 7 of that Act relates to this Part.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) However, the court hearing that application may make an order under this subsection that the first person bear some or all ofthe costs of another person in relation to the application if:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the court is satisfied that the first person made the application, or the first person responded to the application, vexatiously or without reasonable cause; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the court is satisfied that the first person's unreasonable act or omission caused the other person to incur the costs; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the court is satisfied that it should have been reasonably apparent to the first person that the first person's application, or the first person's response to the application, had no reasonable prospect of success.</para></quote>
<para>These amendments are largely technical in nature. They do not substantially change the intended operation of the Net Zero Economy Authority or the energy industry jobs plan it will administer. Rather, the amendments aim to clarify certain elements of the bill to address the concerns of some key stakeholders. The proposed technical amendments have been developed in consultation with the Australian Council of Trade Unions, the Australian Industry Group and the Business Council of Australia. They also take into account consideration of submissions and evidence given to the Senate Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee's inquiry into the bill. Accordingly, I want to thank the BCA, the Ai Group and the ACTU for the positive manner in which they've engaged over the bill.</para>
<para>I also want to acknowledge the many organisations and individuals that took the time to make submissions as part of the Senate committee inquiry examining this bill. We have closely considered all of those submissions and several constructive proposals that came out of those inquiries, which are reflected in these government amendments. It is important to note that the vast majority of submissions to the Senate inquiry were highly supportive of the bill. This reflects the broad community support for the important role that the Net Zero Economy Authority will play as our economy decarbonises.</para>
<para>Turning to the specific amendments: a number of the amendments would improve alignment between the energy industry jobs plan contained in part 5 of the bill and the existing workplace relations framework under the Fair Work Act. These amendments reinforce the government's policy intent that the energy industry jobs plan is complementary to the existing workplace relations framework. Amendments in this category include aligning the judicial remedies for breach of a Fair Work Commission determination under part 5 of the bill in line with the standard approach under the Fair Work Act for breaches of awards, enterprise agreements and other industrial instruments; ensuring that there is an effective dispute resolution procedure involving the Fair Work Commission in relation to disputes concerning an employer's obligations arising under a determination made under part 5 of the bill; and clarifying the requirement that the authority's CEO and the Fair Work Commission must consider the existing supports contained in enterprise agreements and other industrial instruments in relation to both the community-of-interest process and the making of a Fair Work Commission determination under part 5 of the bill.</para>
<para>Other amendments would support employers to successfully engage with the framework. This includes in their interactions with the authority and their legislated obligations. Amendments in this category are based on recommendations from the Australian Industry Group and the Business Council of Australia. They include ensuring all relevant employers and employer representative bodies are adequately consulted throughout the energy industry jobs plan; clarifying how and when employers can provide information to the CEO and how the information gathered by the authority interacts with the Privacy Act; ensuring that employers are given proper notice for any paid time off work for training or career development purposes by their employees and are provided evidence of attendance if requested by the employer; and ensuring that the CEO has the discretion to grant additional time to employers where the authority has exercised its powers to require the provision of information from closing or dependent employers.</para>
<para>As noted when this bill was introduced, generations of Australians have powered our nation safely, reliably and with dignity. This bill will help ensure they continue to do so for generations to come. The government recognises that it has a critical role to play in supporting the communities in which the transition to net zero will be most concentrated. We must support these communities and all of those that live in them and the workers that work in these industries that this bill seeks to address. The authority will work with employers, unions and others to assist workers to engage in new opportunities. Workers in a closing facility will be supported to pursue opportunities for retraining, career mentoring and redeployment.</para>
<para>The proposed model reflects the outcomes of detailed consultations with unions and employer groups. It will support workers on the front line of the energy transition. At the same time, it will support businesses to access the skills and experience these workers possess. Establishing the Net Zero Economy Authority will help deliver better coordination of programs and policies. It will attract investors and help communities make the most of these transformation opportunities. By establishing the authority, we'll engage major stakeholders in the decision-making and support structures. We'll help deliver Australia's future as a renewable energy superpower. This bill will ensure we leave no-one behind in that transformation. I commend the bill and these amendments to the House.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SPENDER</name>
    <name.id>286042</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'd just like to make some brief comments in relation to the government's amendments, and I'll reserve some further remarks for the Net Zero Economy Authority Bill 2024 when I move my own amendments. The creation of the net zero authority is an unprecedented step to tackle the unprecedented challenge of climate change. We have a huge transition to manage and not very much time. So, whilst I am not normally supportive of government playing such an active role in affairs of private companies, I think in this case it's both appropriate and necessary. Ninety per cent of our coal-fired power stations are set to close in the next decade, and we won't be able to support workers through this transition without government stepping in.</para>
<para>This legislation and the amendments go to industrial relations, a topic that is close to my heart. I want to acknowledge the concerns raised by the Business Council of Australia and the Australian Industry Group into some aspects of this bill. The government amendments address several of the concerns raised by business groups, particularly in relation to the interaction between the activities of the authority and existing enterprise agreements and by clarifying notice requirements for employees when they take paid time off to undertake training for a new role. I'm also pleased to see a requirement for consultation with relevant employer groups before a community-of-interest application can be made.</para>
<para>We don't need more complexity in our industrial relations regime. We need less, and so I welcome the government working constructively with business and unions to address some of these issues. If a collaborative approach to streamlining and simplifying industrial relations laws can be taken in this bill, then I urge the government to do so across other areas of the economy.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr SCAMPS</name>
    <name.id>299623</name.id>
    <electorate>Mackellar</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move amendments (1) and (2), as circulated in my name, together:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Clause 5, page 6 (after line 23), after the definition of <inline font-style="italic">Finance Minister</inline>, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">former judge</inline> means:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) a former Justice of the High Court; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) a former judge of the Federal Court of Australia; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) a former judge of the Supreme Court of a State or Territory.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Clause 22, page 23 (after line 18), at the end of the clause, add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) A person must not be appointed as a Board member under this section unless:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the selection of the person for the appointment is the result of a process that includes:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) public advertising of the selection criteria for the position for at least 10 consecutive days; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) assessment of applications against the selection criteria by an independent panel consisting of at least 3 members and chaired by a former judge; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iii) shortlisting of at least 3 persons for the appointment that are certified, in writing, by the panel to meet all of the selection criteria; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the person is one of the shortlisted candidates.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) Within 7 days after a person is appointed as a Board member, the Minister must cause a copy of the written certification for the person (referred to in subparagraph (4)(a)(iii)) to be:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) tabled in each House of the Parliament; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) if a House is not sitting—presented to the Presiding Officer of that House for circulation to the members of that House.</para></quote>
<para>One of the reasons the good people of Mackellar sent me to this place was to fight for stronger action on climate change. The most critical action required to do that, as every climate expert agrees, is to transition away from our reliance on fossil fuels to an economy powered by renewable energy. The Net Zero Economy Authority, to be established by this bill, seeks to support that transition. I am supportive of this bill but offer important amendments to improve the independence and integrity of the authority.</para>
<para>My amendments seek to inject into the Net Zero Economy Authority Bill a more robust and independent process for the appointment of members to its board. As currently drafted, the board of between five and nine members is to be appointed by the Prime Minister. The only requirement in relation to the appointment of board members is found in clause 22(1) of the bill:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The Board members are to be appointed by the Minister by written instrument.</para></quote>
<para>The bill goes on to require that two of the board members have expertise or experience and professional credibility and significant standing in the trade union movement. Another two must satisfy those criteria in the business industry, finance or investment field. The rest must fulfil those experience and credibility requirements either in those fields already mentioned or in industrial relations, economics, decarbonisation policy, climate change policy, energy markets, regional development, First Nations engagement or governance or law. This is all well and good as far as it goes, but those requirements are not selection criteria. They do not constitute a process the Prime Minister must follow when deciding who to select. Most importantly they do not in any way guarantee any level of independence in those appointments. Independence and expertise are not the same thing.</para>
<para>Over the last decade the integrity of many institutions that underpin our democracy has taken a battering. One key reason for this has been the lack of independent appointment processes to major Commonwealth bodies. Over previous terms we witnessed the jobs-for-mates culture flourish here in Canberra, as rates of politically friendly appointments to important public boards and entities soared. One of those entities, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, was so heavily stacked with political appointees—at a rate of 40 per cent of appointments during the last parliamentary term—that the current Attorney-General has been forced to abolish it and create a new tribunal in its place. To the Attorney's credit, in establishing the new Administrative Review Tribunal he listed to the advocacy of myself and others and legislated for there to be a mandatory independent selection panel process for the appointment of new tribunal members. It will be a better institution because of that—less able to be compromised and co-opted for political purposes.</para>
<para>We must actively legislate to build integrity infrastructure into all the institutions that underpin our democracy and inform national policy, otherwise how can the Australian people trust the decisions that flow from these entities and institutions? The very best solution would be the enactment of comprehensive legislation that requires a transparent, accountable and independent process for all major Commonwealth public appointments, such as my private member's bill I introduced last year, 'ending jobs for mates'—a gold standard process developed in consultation with the Centre for Public Integrity which balances ministerial discretion with ensuring a candidate is independently selected based on their expertise, experience and integrity. Until that robust process becomes law, I have no choice but to introduce individual amendments to each bill that seeks to establish new bodies with major public appointments.</para>
<para>My amendments to this bill ensure that, in addition to experience and expertise, the board of the Net Zero Economy Authority is selected without undue political interference. After all, one can have proper experience but still take family holidays with the minister responsible for the appointment. Therefore, in the selection of members for the board of the Net Zero Economy Authority, my amendments require that the positions and selection criteria be publicly advertised for a minimum of 10 consecutive days; that the assessment of applications be undertaken by an independent selection panel with at least three members and a former superior court judge as chair; that the panel shortlist at least three candidates for each position and certify that they meet the selection criteria; that the minister chooses the successful candidate only from the shortlist; and that the certification of the successful candidate be tabled in parliament. I urge all members of this House to get on board with ending the jobs-for-mates culture in Canberra by supporting this amendment to the Net Zero Economy Authority bill.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GORMAN</name>
    <name.id>74519</name.id>
    <electorate>Perth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Just for the information of members of the House, the government won't be supporting this amendment. I just want to outline both how we expect the board to operate and the responsibilities which board members will have. The board will be appointed by the responsible minister. In making that appointment, the minister must be the satisfied board members collectively have the appropriate balance of expertise and experience in fields relevant to the functions of the authority. It's very clear in the bill, setting out some very direct expectations in those appointments. Two members must have experience in the work of trade unions or representation of working people. Two members must have experience in business, industry, finance or investment. We've also very clearly outlined the other expectations of what the minister would need to consider in making those appointments, having regard for experience in things such as industrial relations, labour market adjustment, economics, greenhouse gas emissions reduction pathways, technology or policy expertise, climate change policy, energy markets, regional development, First Nations engagement, advocacy work, community leadership, public or corporate governance and/or the law. These board members are expected to make a serious commitment to the Net Zero Economy Authority. Their appointments are to be part time. They are not full-time statutory office holders. They're put up for five years and are eligible for reappointment.</para>
<para>I want to note in these debates when we're talking about the appointment of board members of a statutory authority such as the one we are seeking to legislate it's important that there are very clear legal obligations on any board member that is appointed, including that they must declare and manage all conflicts of interest. That's an essential part of the appointment process. In doing their duties, they must act in the best interests of the authority and not in the interests of any other organisation. They must recuse themselves from decision-making where they face conflicts.</para>
<para>The role of the board is in determining the broader policies and strategies of the authority. It is a governing board and it's been clearly outlined as such, meaning it has responsibility for the authority's strategy, governance and performance, including financial performance and spending of public money. In addition, it has some very clear responsibilities under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act, which again places very high expectations on anyone who takes on a role on a government statutory board such as this, including promoting the purpose of the entity and defining strategy, ensuring systems and policies for the proper use of public resources, systems performance measurement, reporting and accountability, systems and policies for risk management and internal controls and establishing a committee.</para>
<para>The board also has the role of recommending CEO candidates for appointment by the minister. The reason I raise that in terms of the power of the board is to also talk about how, when it comes to CEO appointments, the provisions of the bill are supported by the merit and transparency policy which has been in place for the Commonwealth since 2008. That policy does require a merit based and transparent process be used for the appointment of agency heads and will apply to the CEO position of the Net Zero Economy Authority. It puts out requirements and guidelines, including selection criteria, the requirement of advertising of the position and the use of the selection panel. Appointments that the minister makes are also bound by general government policies on board appointments as contained in the <inline font-style="italic">Cabinet Handbook</inline>,which is publicly available for anyone interested in the work of the cabinet or, indeed, this particular authority. It also includes a range of expectations around the diversity on boards.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question before the House is that the amendments moved by the honourable member for Mackellar be agreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [16:43]<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>Chaney, K. E.</name>
                  <name>Daniel, Z.</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                  <name>Le, D.</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A. (Teller)</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>45</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Ananda-Rajah, M.</name>
                  <name>Belyea, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Burnell, M. P.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Charlton, A. H. G.</name>
                  <name>Chesters, L. M.</name>
                  <name>Coker, E. A.</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>Gillespie, D. A.</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P.</name>
                  <name>Gosling, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Hill, J. C.</name>
                  <name>King, C. F.</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>Mitchell, R. G.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>Payne, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Pearce, G. B.</name>
                  <name>Perrett, G. D.</name>
                  <name>Plibersek, T. J.</name>
                  <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                  <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Smith, D. P. B. (Teller)</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>Vasta, R. X.</name>
                  <name>Violi, A. A.</name>
                  <name>Watts, T. G.</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>16:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SPENDER</name>
    <name.id>286042</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move the amendment circulated in my name:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Page 79 (after line 7), after clause 80, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">80A Review of the operation of this Act</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Every 4 years, the Minister must cause an independent review to be conducted of the operation of this Act.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Without limiting subsection (1), the review must:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) examine the effectiveness of the Authority in performing its functions, including against the object of this Act in section 3; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) having regard to the object of this Act, examine the appropriateness of the following definitions in section 5:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) <inline font-style="italic">closing employer</inline>;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) <inline font-style="italic">dependent employer</inline>;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iii) <inline font-style="italic">receiving employer</inline>; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) make provision for public consultation.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) The first review must commence as soon as practicable after the end of the period of 4 years after the day this Act commences.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) The persons who conduct the review must give the Minister a written report of the review as soon as practicable and, in any event, not later than 9 months after commencement of the review.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) 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 report is given to the Minister.</para></quote>
<para>All the indicators are flashing red when it comes to the climate crisis. The year 2023 was the hottest year on record, and this record already looks like being broken in 2024. Climate scientists are telling us we're going to blast past 2.5 degrees, and the Great Barrier Reef is experiencing yet another mass bleaching event. To avert the worst impacts of global heating, we need to rapidly accelerate the transition. We need to get off fossil fuels, build the green industries of the future and help workers and communities through the process.</para>
<para>The clean energy transition will be a big challenge for the Australian economy. We'll need to shift people and resources out of coal and gas, massively ramp up renewable energy and develop the workforce to power the industries of the future. It's a transition that won't happen overnight, won't always be easy to manage and won't succeed without proper coordination, and that's what this bill is all about.</para>
<para>The aim of the Net Zero Economy Authority is to help facilitate investment, coordinate policy and help workers and communities through the transition from fossil fuels to the industries of the future. It's vital we get this right. If we don't, regional communities will be left behind, support for the transition will be fatally undermined and we'll miss out on a huge economic opportunity. The new authority has big responsibilities: keeping communities together, ensuring the benefits of the transition are shared, and listening to and learning from communities when we don't get things right. This is what the authority and this legislation must deliver.</para>
<para>This is a good bill and it has broad support from the climate movement, business groups and unions. That's a great place to start. But there is no doubt this bill could be improved, and my amendment seeks to do this. In particular, I'm concerned the authority's scope is too narrow, focusing exclusively on coal-fired power station workers and the mines that supply them. With 90 per cent of coal going offline in the next decade, it's right that these workers are the first priority for support. But for the authority to have enduring impact it will need to work across a broader range of industries over time and adapt its activities as our economy transitions. For example, we know that, as the world economy decarbonises, demand for our fossil fuel exports will reduce; yet, as currently drafted, this legislation precludes the authority from supporting people working in coal and gas mining for exports. A worker in the Hunter Valley at a coalmine associated with a power station would be eligible for support, but a worker in the same region at an exporting coalmine would not. That's despite those two people doing the same job, facing the challenges if their mines close, and perhaps even living next door to each other. The government should have drafted legislation that was broader in the scope of industries the authority could support and mandated an annual plan to ensure focus of the authority's activities from year to year.</para>
<para>If this can't be done right now, the government should at least be open to revisiting the scope of the authority's activities in future. My amendment helps to achieve this by inserting a review clause into the legislation. The review would require periodic assessment of whether the scope of industries supported is appropriate and whether the broader objectives set out in the legislation are being achieved. The first review would take place after four years, enabling the authority to support several coal closures before looking at how things could be done better.</para>
<para>I understand that the government won't be supporting this amendment, but the reasons for this are unclear. I know the bill requires the CEO to conduct a narrowly focused internal review of the Energy Industry Jobs Plan within 12 months, but this is not the kind of substantive, independent review that also looks at the scope of activities and whether the authority is delivering results, so I encourage the government to think again and support this commonsense amendment.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TINK</name>
    <name.id>300124</name.id>
    <electorate>North Sydney</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise in support of the amendment moved by the member for Wentworth because I think it is infinitely reasonable. If there's one thing we know, it's that the people of Australia are looking to this government and this parliament to move faster when it comes to climate action. The introduction of the Net Zero Economy Authority is something that many see as a really positive step. But it is bamboozling for many to try to get their heads around why you would limit the potential of this authority to guide us through this transition period. We all know that to hit net zero by 2050 we're going to have to tackle every single part of our economy. If this is to be the organisation that sets due north for our society, our economy, our communities—really importantly, our regional communities, who are looking to their future—why would we not make the scope of this authority broader?</para>
<para>I commend the member's amendment and seek the same clarification she seeks from the minister: why not step into this in a bold way, rather than a contained way that's like a whimper?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GORMAN</name>
    <name.id>74519</name.id>
    <electorate>Perth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I welcome the comments from the member for Wentworth, who emphasised the importance of listening and learning as we go through this global transition and the unique way that Australia will experience it. I also want to thank the member for North Sydney, who rightly pointed out that many see this bill as a really positive step.</para>
<para>I want to address where the government has already committed to reviews of the work of the authority. They include a statutory review of the Energy Industry Jobs Plan framework, which will be completed within 12 months of the establishment of the authority. We've said very clearly that we hope the authority will be established by 1 July. That would see that work being done by the middle of next year. That would allow us to assess the plan. It would allow early engagement with regional employers to see how that piece of the legislation is working and allow us to talk to communities and unions. Further, I think it's important for the House to be aware that there will also be a review of the authority conducted in accordance with the Commonwealth Governance Structures Policy. That requires that there be a review at least every 10 years—and I note that it can be done more regularly—to ensure flexibility of the functions that are set out in the bill and that there is opportunity for further engagement.</para>
<para>Of course, it is always up to the parliament—this House and the Senate—to engage on legislation that's passed at any point in time. In terms of the authority's engagement with the parliament, each year a corporate plan will be tabled, setting out objectives, priorities and the intended work plan, in accordance with the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act. We would expect there to be thorough examination of the work of the authority by senators, and indeed that questions, either in question time or on notice, would be asked.</para>
<para>Finally, I want to note that the powers that are in this bill, outside of the energy industry jobs plan, are very broad. The bill gives power to a new authority that can coordinate across government to lower emissions and to support the net zero transition. It can facilitate public and private investment in transformational net zero initiatives not just in the regions but anywhere in Australia where it is in our national interest to do so. It ensures that communities will better understand and be able to participate in this economic transformation, and, again, the authority has the powers to do that. There's specific mention in the objects of the bill to ensure Indigenous Australians participate in and benefit from this transition to net zero, and this amendment seeks, as indeed does the government, a real focus on ensuring workers in emissions-intensive industries can access new skills and new employment opportunities that come with net zero. In saying that, the government doesn't support this amendment, as we believe that both the powers in the bill as it stands and the existing review mechanisms are adequate.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr HAINES</name>
    <name.id>282335</name.id>
    <electorate>Indi</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I have a question for the minister with regard to a 10-year review period. This is a wide-ranging Net Zero Economy Authority undertaking expertise and transformation across a range of technologies, as you say, and those technologies change rapidly. Ten years seems like an extraordinary length of time before the authority has a solid look at itself. If we're talking about communities participating or giving feedback or if we're talking about what works and what doesn't, it seems extraordinary to me that the review period, as the minister just described, would be after 10 years. Could I ask the minister to expand on that and give me and, I'm sure, other people some assurance that there would be periods before 10 years when the authority actually makes changes, iterations or adjustments?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GORMAN</name>
    <name.id>74519</name.id>
    <electorate>Perth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I welcome the opportunity to outline that, in the first 365 days of the operation of the authority, there will be the review of one large component of the authority's work. That's a review of the energy industry jobs plan framework. With regard to my reference to the Commonwealth's governance structures policy, which requires a review every 10 years, that's 'at least' every 10 years; it can be done earlier and, indeed, it could be done much earlier, but I'm not in a position to say when that would be. Obviously, it requires the parliament to legislate for the authority to be enacted in the first place.</para>
<para>We do recognise that it is both a long-term transition and also something with some very-fast-moving changes in technology and something where some communities can experience what the change means to local communities, local employment and local economies very quickly. We do believe that this gets the balance right in addition to all those standard parliamentary accountability mechanisms, including the annual tabling of the corporate plan.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SPENDER</name>
    <name.id>286042</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you, Minister, for your comments. You refer to the energy industry jobs plan review, which would be undertaken within the first year. However, my understanding is that it does not go to scope and so, therefore, is not relevant to the question that I raised in my speech, which was basically that a significant group of workers would not be included as part of that internal review and, therefore, that review doesn't go to the core question that I'm raising in my amendment.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The question before the House is that the amendment moved by the honourable member for Wentworth be agreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [17:02]<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>Chaney, K. E.</name>
                  <name>Daniel, Z.</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Tink, K. J.</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>Burnell, M. P.</name>
                  <name>Burns, J.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Charlton, A. H. G.</name>
                  <name>Chesters, L. M.</name>
                  <name>Coker, E. A.</name>
                  <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Entsch, W. G.</name>
                  <name>Fernando, C.</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P.</name>
                  <name>Hill, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Kearney, G. M.</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>McBride, E. M.</name>
                  <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, R. G.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, E. L.</name>
                  <name>Payne, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Pearce, G. B.</name>
                  <name>Perrett, G. D.</name>
                  <name>Plibersek, T. J.</name>
                  <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                  <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                  <name>Smith, D. P. B. (Teller)</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>Vasta, R. X.</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><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr HAINES</name>
    <name.id>282335</name.id>
    <electorate>Indi</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move amendments (1) to (8), (14) and (15) on the sheet revised 29 May 2024, as circulated in my name, together:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Clause 3, page 2 (line 16), omit "ensure Australia's regions and workers", substitute "ensure Australia's communities and workers, especially in regional, rural and remote Australia,".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Clause 3, page 2 (line 18), at the end of the clause, add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">; and (d) facilitate community leadership of economic diversification in response to Australia's transition to a net zero emissions economy, in order to maximise outcomes for communities.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Clause 5, page 5 (after line 23), after the definition of <inline font-style="italic">Commonwealth entity</inline>, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">community benefit plan</inline> means a plan made under subsection 68CB(3).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) Clause 5, page 6 (after line 6), after the definition of <inline font-style="italic">dependent employer</inline>, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">developer</inline>, of a net zero transformation initiative, includes a proponent and an operator of the project or initiative.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) Clause 5, page 7 (after line 21), after the definition of <inline font-style="italic">Kyoto Protocol</inline>, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">large renewable energy project</inline> has the meaning given by subsection 68AE(2).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) Clause 5, page 7 (after line 24), after the definition of <inline font-style="italic">likely to prejudice national security</inline>, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">local energy hub</inline> means a hub referred to in subparagraph 16(1)(db)(i) (see also Part 5B).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(7) Clause 16, page 17 (after line 24), after paragraph (1)(d), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(da) to support communities that are hosting net zero transformation initiatives, especially those communities in areas where there has historically been agriculture and other forms of primary production;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(db) to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) establish and maintain one or more local energy hubs in each region affected by Australia's transition to a net zero emissions economy; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) develop community benefit plans for communities in each region affected by a net zero transformation initiative; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iii) assist with planning and coordinating other transitional measures to improve and embed sustainable local infrastructure and services that enhance wellbeing in each region affected by Australia's transition to a net zero emissions economy;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(dc) to facilitate community leadership of economic diversification in response to Australia's transition to a net zero emissions economy, in order to maximise outcomes for communities;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(8) Clause 16, page 18 (after line 2), at the end of the subclause (1), add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note 3: For subparagraph (db)(ii), a community benefit plan for a community affected by a net zero transformation initiative could include benefits such as:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) jobs in the initiative; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) childcare services; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) health services; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) roads, bridges and other transport infrastructure; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) public infrastructure; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(f) cheap and reliable energy, including energy security during emergencies; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(g) affordable housing; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(h) communications services; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) a community benefit fund.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(14) Page 67 (after line 27), after Part 5, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Part 5A — Developers of net zero transformation initiatives</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Division 1 — Preliminary</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">68AA Simplified outline of this Part</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Before facilitating the participation of or investment by a developer from the private sector in a net zero transformation initiative as described in paragraph 16(1)(b), the Authority must ensure that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the developer has a high rating under the scheme mentioned in Division 2; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) if applicable, the developer has allowed for community investment in the initiative under the scheme mentioned in Division 3.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note: This Part only applies to a developer of a net zero transformation initiative to the extent that the Authority is performing the Authority's function under paragraph 16(1)(b) in circumstances permitted by subsection 16(4).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">68AB Concurrent operation of State and Territory laws</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">It is the Parliament's intention that a law of a State or Territory should be able to operate concurrently with this Part unless the law is directly inconsistent with this Part.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Division 2 — Developer rating scheme</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">68AC Facilitating public and private sector participant and investment</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Before facilitating the participation of or investment by a developer from the private sector in a net zero transformation initiative as described in paragraph 16(1)(b), the Authority must ensure that the developer has a high rating under the scheme prescribed for the purposes of section 68AD.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">68AD Developer rating scheme</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) The rules must prescribe a voluntary scheme for rating developers of net zero transformation initiatives in Australia.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) For the purposes of (but without limiting) subsection (1), the scheme must:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) empower the Authority to rate a developer's or potential developer's past or potential performance on:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) engagement relating to net zero transformation initiatives; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) providing benefits to communities affected by net zero transformation initiatives; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iii) locating infrastructure involved with net zero transformation initiatives; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iv) other specified matters relating to net zero transformation initiatives; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) be designed to motivate developers to continuously improve on such matters; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) provide for the criteria by which the Authority determines such ratings; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) provide for how a developer or potential developer may apply for such a rating, which may include requiring applications to be made in a manner and form approved by the Authority; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) provide for the regular review and updating by the Authority of:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) such ratings; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) the criteria for determining them; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(f) provide that applications may be made to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for review of decisions by the Authority under the scheme; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(g) provide for the establishment and maintenance of a public register that records such ratings and the criteria for determining them.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note: The scheme may provide for other matters.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) In designing the scheme, the Minister must have regard to consultation conducted by the Authority with:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the Commonwealth, the States, the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) peak bodies for local governments, industry and Indigenous persons; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) representative community groups.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Division 3 — Community investment in large renewable energy projects</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">68AE Authority must ensure that developers of large renewable energy projects allow for community investment</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Before facilitating the participation of or investment by a developer from the private sector in a large renewable energy project as described in paragraph 16(1)(b), the Authority must ensure that the developer has complied with the scheme prescribed for the purposes of section 68AF.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) A <inline font-style="italic">large renewable energy project</inline> is a project or initiative that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) is a net zero transformation initiative; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) involves constructing, modifying or expanding a renewable energy generation facility in Australia having a maximum capacity of 10 MW or more; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) starts on or after the commencement of this Act.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">68AF Scheme for community investment in large renewable energy projects</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) The rules must prescribe a voluntary scheme under which the developer of a large renewable energy project engages with all individuals living within 30 km of the project (the <inline font-style="italic">locals</inline>) and gives the locals a reasonable opportunity to invest in the project.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) For the purposes of (but without limiting) subsection (1), the scheme must ensure that this opportunity involves:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) rights to at least 20% of the profits from the project being offered to the locals; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the locals having been given a reasonable opportunity to consider and respond to the offer; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the consideration (if any) payable in exchange for the rights being reasonable, having regard to the market value of the rights; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) the offer being structured in a way that is intended to ensure that the rights are acquired by a large number of locals rather than by just a few individuals.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Subsection (2) does not prevent the rights mentioned in paragraph (2)(a) from being offered to anyone else, after the offer mentioned in that subsection closes, to the extent that the locals do not accept the offer.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) In designing the scheme, the Minister must have regard to consultation conducted by the Authority with:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the Commonwealth, the States, the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) peak bodies for local governments, industry and Indigenous persons; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) representative community groups.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(15) Page 68 (before line 1), before Part 6, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Part 5B — Local energy hubs</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">68BA Simplified outline of this Part</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Local energy hubs are to provide support for regions affected by Australia's transition to a net zero emissions economy.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">68BB Local energy hubs</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) When establishing and maintaining a local energy hub in a region affected by Australia's transition to a net zero emissions economy (see subparagraph 16(1)(db)(i)), the Authority must ensure that the local energy hub is staffed by local outreach officers who are trained to support communities.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) To support the local energy hubs in a region that is also a region referred to in subsection 16(2), the Authority must establish and maintain an office in that region.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">68BC Functions of local energy hubs</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The functions of a local energy hub for a region are:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) to support each of the region's communities, including as follows:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) engaging with developers of large-scale net zero transformation initiatives proposed in or near the community;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) facilitating an understanding of net zero transformation initiatives proposed in or near the community, including concerns regarding fire risk, insurance premium increases and biosecurity risks;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iii) communicating locally informed, clear expectations to industry on how the community would like to be engaged and participate in project plans for large-scale net zero transformation initiatives proposed in or near the community;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iv) facilitating energy literacy programs targeted at low-income households to reduce energy costs;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(v) advising on household energy efficiency, electrification and bill savings;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(vi) assisting with accessing government grants and subsidies relating to Australia's transition to a net zero emissions economy;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(vii) advising on the feasibility of community energy projects;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(viii) advising agricultural businesses looking to utilise clean energy technologies; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) to assist with developing, and monitoring compliance with, community benefit plans relating to the region (see Part 5C); and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) to make recommendations to the Authority on the region's needs and priorities; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) any other functions conferred on the local energy hub by the Authority.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note: A reference in this section to a net zero transformation initiative could include a renewable energy project or a project relating to transmission lines.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Part 5C — Community benefit plans</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">68CA Simplified outline of this Part</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The Authority may work with:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) a developer of a net zero transformation initiative; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the communities, landholders, groups or individuals affected by that initiative;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">to develop a community benefit plan.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The developer must comply with the plan.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">68CB Identifying affected communities and making plans to benefit them</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) The Authority must make reasonable efforts to identify the communities, landholders, groups or individuals (the <inline font-style="italic">affected entities</inline>) affected by each net zero transformation initiative.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) The Authority must make reasonable efforts to work with each developer of the initiative, and the affected entities, to identify ways how the developer can:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) engage with the affected entities; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) provide benefits related to the initiative to those affected entities.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) The Authority may make a written plan requiring the developer of the initiative to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) engage in one or more specified ways with the affected entities specified in the plan; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) provide one or more specified benefits to those affected entities.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note: For examples of benefits, see note 3 to subsection 16(1).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) The Authority must give a copy of the plan to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the developer of the initiative; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) each of the affected entities or to their representatives.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">68CC Compliance with community benefit plans</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">A person contravenes this section if:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the person is a developer of a net zero transformation initiative; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the person is given a copy of a community benefit plan for the initiative; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the person fails to comply with the plan.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Civil penalty: 600 penalty units.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">68CD Internal review of community benefit plans</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) If the Authority decides to make a community benefit plan (the <inline font-style="italic">original decision</inline>), the Authority must give written notice of the original decision to the persons whose interests it affects. The notice must include a statement to the effect that such a person may, if the person is dissatisfied with the decision, apply to the Authority for an internal review of the original decision.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Such an application by a person for an internal review of the original decision must:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) set out the reasons for the application; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) be made within 28 days after the day the person is informed of the decision.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Upon receiving such an application, the Authority must:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) reconsider the original decision; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) decide to affirm, vary or revoke the original decision.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) This Act, other than subsections (1) and (2), applies to the decision under paragraph (3)(b) (the <inline font-style="italic">internal review decision</inline>) as if it were the original decision.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) The Authority must give written notice of the internal review decision to the applicant. The notice must include a statement to the effect that the applicant may, if the applicant is dissatisfied with the internal review decision, apply to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal in accordance with the <inline font-style="italic">Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act </inline>1975 for review of the internal review decision.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) Failure to comply with this subsection (1) or (5) does not affect the validity of a decision.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">68CE Review by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Applications may be made to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for review of a decision of the Authority under paragraph 68CD(3)(b).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">68CF Involving local energy hubs</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The Authority is to involve the relevant local energy hub when:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) acting under section 68CB in relation to a net zero transformation initiative; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) monitoring compliance with a community benefit plan.</para></quote>
<para>These amendments are about realising community engagement and benefit in the net zero economy. They're about showing regional Australia the pathway to a prosperous economy for future generations as we transition to a clean economy. The government says this bill is about promoting orderly and positive economic transformation associated with achieving net zero emissions. Unfortunately, though, the bill as currently drafted seems to only set out how to achieve this for communities transitioning out of fossil fuel industries. It does nothing for the communities in my electorate and across regional Australia that are transitioning into renewable energy for the very first time. Unless these communities are included in the bill, I truly struggle to see how a positive and orderly net zero economy will be realised. I truly do.</para>
<para>In Indi, farming communities are being approached to host massive solar farms and battery energy storage systems—key projects to get us to the government's net zero target. But right now, let me tell you, some in these communities are fighting to prevent these projects getting off the ground. There are two reasons for this. They don't feel like they are being fairly and respectfully engaged by project developers. Their questions are not answered in a way that relieves their worries about the impact on their insurance, their farms and the beautiful natural environment that surrounds them—the beautiful natural environment that they know is at peril from climate change but that they see changing in front of their very eyes, without any engagement that satisfies them. Second, the communities expected to host the large-scale renewable projects can't see how this will bring long-term prosperity to the whole community.</para>
<para>My amendments offer practical ways for the government to ensure that renewable energy developers meaningfully engage with communities, they do it early, they do it often and they do it in a respectful way. My amendments would give powers for the authority to develop and implement local energy hubs. The minister says, quite clearly, that the authority will be the shopfront for industry and investors. But I ask: Where is the community? What about community members and landholders who want to know more about what this industry is planning in their region? A local energy hub would be the shopfront for local communities situated in towns across regional, rural and remote Australia, staffed by trusted, reliable people who know the community and can assist them with understanding the renewable energy being built, how developers should engage with them and what benefit they and the wider community can receive from the project.</para>
<para>My amendments also allow for a developer rating scheme. This is a recommendation of Professor Andrew Dyer's Community Engagement Review, accepted in principle by the Minister for Climate Change and Energy, Chris Bowen. A developer rating scheme would show the public a developer's track record on things like community engagement so that, when a landholder receives a letter in the mail or a knock on the door from a developer or prospector for the next solar farm, that landholder can assess whether that developer is in fact trusted and reputable.</para>
<para>Critically, my amendments create pathways for communities to achieve regional prosperity, and they do this by creating powers for the authority to administer community benefit plans. Like the energy industry jobs plan already in the bill, a community benefit plan would demonstrate tangible benefits to communities that find themselves at the forefront of energy generation, storage or transmission for the very first time. I'm talking about things as tangible as a share in the project itself or lower power bills for homes and businesses near the development. It could be skilling up workers for long-term jobs or investment in roads and affordable housing. It could be providing public transport or building a new mobile phone tower to improve telecommunications in a country town—true long-term, game-changing benefits, real benefits that developers can provide. If for-profit renewable energy developers want communities to host their projects, they must show what's in it for the communities. But government tell me now that they won't be supporting these amendments, because right now they want to focus on the communities transitioning out of coal- and gas-fired power stations. But surely this government can walk and chew gum at the same time. They can support the communities to transition while supporting communities experiencing a transition—communities who are not moving from coal and gas but communities who are now being asked to host large-scale grid developments. We need to think about all of them.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GORMAN</name>
    <name.id>74519</name.id>
    <electorate>Perth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member Indi, who I would hope almost all in this place would acknowledge does engage deeply with her community, brings their voice here, acts in their interest and engages deeply in these complex questions of the energy transition—not just the questions that are in front of us in this bill but also the questions that are in front of us across a range of pieces of work of government. The member Indi stole my line, which is that the government will not be supporting these amendments, but we are committed, and I want to emphasise the government's commitment to ensuring communities impacted by the rollout of major infrastructure are properly consulted and to ensuring community expectations surrounding engagement, planning and community benefits are met.</para>
<para>We welcome the advocacy, but it is the government's view that the Australian Energy Infrastructure Commissioner—not the Net Zero Economy Authority—is the best place for this work to be done. That's why in the 2024-25 budget we included $18.2 million to enhance the role of the Australian Energy Infrastructure Commissioner, including implementing recommendations of the recent community engagement review. I emphasise that because it shows that much of that work—particularly on community consultation for new infrastructure—is already under way. That work and that review includes establishing and developing a ratings scheme and fast-tracking the delivery of direct bill relief and other community benefits to regions most affected by renewable infrastructure developments. This is one of the many reasons the government is not supporting these amendments.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr HAINES</name>
    <name.id>282335</name.id>
    <electorate>Indi</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I have a question for the minister. I am really pleased that the government undertook the Dyer review, and I was very pleased to work with Professor Dyer as he undertook a series of forums right across rural and regional Australia, including in my electorate of Indi. Many people from my community who are being directly affected by the energy transition came to those forums and gave their views to Professor Dyer. I was very pleased to see the nine recommendations that came through that review, and I'm very pleased that in the budget the government recognised that this is work that needs to be done. My question to the minister would be: in regard to the Energy Infrastructure Commissioner, has the government considered placing that commission in the Net Zero Economy Authority?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GORMAN</name>
    <name.id>74519</name.id>
    <electorate>Perth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's not in the bill that's before us—it's not the government's view at this time that that's the path we will take.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr HAINES</name>
    <name.id>282335</name.id>
    <electorate>Indi</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I put it to the minister that ensuring that the work of the Net Zero Economy Authority actually achieves its purpose in communities broader than the communities transitioning out of fossil fuel energy generation means there needs to be surety that the Energy Infrastructure Commission can have the grunt that it needs to do its work. It makes complete sense to me that there needs to be strong consideration about how it will actually achieve community benefit outside of the communities that this current bill is focusing on. In regard to things like review of the commission or the authority, things like understanding whether true community benefit—and I describe community benefit as being true regional development—is actually going to be achieved by this authority if we don't have it in the legislation, there needs to be coherent, consistent, neutral advice, such as the Energy Infrastructure Commissioner has been able to give to people who have concerns, and I put it to the minister that these local energy hubs could achieve that as well. I'm not really convinced in any way that the Net Zero Economy Authority has within its legislative framework the capacity to achieve this in regional Australia. I would ask that the minister does give real consideration as to exactly how this is going to happen, because it certainly looks pretty vague on reading of this legislation, and I say that as someone who does wish to engage in good faith on this.</para>
<para>I have deep concerns that the Net Zero Economy Authority will not achieve its aim beyond the communities that you're focusing on if we don't get this right. We've got to stop thinking about just our social licence in regional communities; we've got to think about true long-term regional development. That's what I'd put to the minister to consider.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question before the House is that the amendments moved by the honourable member for Indi be agreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [17:19]<br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>8</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Chaney, K. E.</name>
                  <name>Daniel, Z.</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z.</name>
                  <name>Tink, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Wilkie, A. D.</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>44</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Ananda-Rajah, M.</name>
                  <name>Belyea, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Burnell, M. P.</name>
                  <name>Burns, J.</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>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Entsch, W. G.</name>
                  <name>Fernando, C.</name>
                  <name>Freelander, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Garland, C. M. L.</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P.</name>
                  <name>Hill, J. C.</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, R. G.</name>
                  <name>Mulino, D.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, E. L.</name>
                  <name>Payne, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Perrett, G. D.</name>
                  <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                  <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                  <name>Smith, D. P. B. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Vamvakinou, M.</name>
                  <name>Watts, T. G.</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>17:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr HAINES</name>
    <name.id>282335</name.id>
    <electorate>Indi</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move amendments (12) and (13) on the sheet revised 29 May 2024, as circulated in my name, together:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(12) Clause 23, page 24 (lines 11 to 13), omit paragraph (2)(d), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) 1 other Board member with expertise or experience, professional credibility and significant standing in the field mentioned in paragraph (3)(h); and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) up to 3 other Board members with expertise or experience, professional credibility and significant standing in any of the fields mentioned in subsection (3).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(13) Clause 23, page 24 (lines 14 and 15), omit "Paragraphs (b) and (c) do not by implication limit paragraph (a) or (d).", substitute "Paragraphs (b), (c) and (d) do not by implication limit paragraph (a) or (e).".</para></quote>
<para>These amendments would ensure the board, which provides advice to the authority, includes a member with expertise or experience, professional credibility and significant standing in regional development. These amendments are an obvious improvement to the bill. Without these amendments, having a board member with regional development credentials would only be optional. But regional development experience on the board is vital to the success of the authority; it shouldn't be optional. To properly support regional communities, the authority must actually hear from a member from these communities. The authority must work with communities to determine what they need and want from the net zero energy transformation, and having somebody on the board who comes from the regions will help achieve this.</para>
<para>It's not just living in the regions that will make this board member valuable; it's about having experience in regional development too. When I talk about regional development, I'm talking about thriving, prosperous communities. I want to see this board member advocate for the transformational opportunity the net zero economy presents for regional communities—things like quality health care, available child care and well-paid, long-term jobs. I'm also talking about stable phone and internet connections, roads that aren't riddled with potholes and a cheap, reliable source of energy that's shared locally. This is what regional communities must expect from the net zero transformation, but it's not being shown to them right now. A board member with regional development expertise is a step towards realising prosperous livelihoods in the regions in a net zero economy.</para>
<para>I don't want to steal the minister's thunder here, but I think I'm going to do it again because it's important I say this: I understand the government will support these amendments, and I'm pleased that they will, of course. I thank the Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister and the Prime Minister himself for meeting with me and discussing what is something I feel very passionate about. I want to emphasise—and I really want you to listen carefully to this—that having a regional member on the board of the authority will only be as useful as the authority itself. A regional board member must not be there to only support the regional communities transitioning out of fossil fuel industries. At the same time, the board and the authority must direct its work to the regional communities transitioning into renewable energy; I'm going to keep saying it because it's critical. I'm talking about the regional communities that are being told they are in renewable energy zones but don't know what this means. These are communities that are suddenly being told that they are in 'ideal' locations for grid-scale solar farms with turbines and large battery storage systems—told, not invited to plan and participate in this massive transformation. Communities are not being given the opportunity to plan their futures right now. To achieve net zero with these communities, we must reframe the question from, 'How do we gain their social licence?' to 'How do we achieve regional development and prosperity for them?' I'm going to keep saying that too, because it's just so critical.</para>
<para>My other amendments to this bill provide the pathways towards showing regional development—not merely writing it down in words but actually showing it. They're about action. I'm disappointed that the government is not supporting them at this time, but I look forward to continued discussions with the government, including with the Prime Minister and the Minister for Climate Change and Energy, about how this can be realised. A board member with regional development experience is a good start, but we have a long way to go to ensure that their expertise is going to be utilised. I will be watching this very, very closely.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GORMAN</name>
    <name.id>74519</name.id>
    <electorate>Perth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Indi, not just for moving these amendments but also for separating them from her other amendments so that, as she foreshadowed, in very kind terms, the government is prepared to agree to these amendments. We have already indicated that to the member for Indi in conversations between myself, the Prime Minister and the member.</para>
<para>We agree that there's benefit in requiring that one member of the authority has significant expertise in regional development. We see that this will ensure that the board—and we've already outlined those broad areas we want—has the right skills mix. I of course note that the government's obligations that will apply to this member of the board will be exactly the same as for all other members of the board. We do recognise that an important piece of the work of this authority will be to prioritise communities in regions that are, or will be, significantly affected by Australia's transition to a net zero economy.</para>
<para>I thank the member for Indi for her engagement on this and for outlining her reasons for these particular amendments, effectively persuading the Prime Minister and others in the government. We're pleased to support these amendments.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SPENDER</name>
    <name.id>286042</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise in support of the work of the member for Indi on this, and also for all the amendments that she has put forward on this bill. I represent a community which is, physically, one of the smallest communities in the country, and probably one of the least rural or regional in the country. But what my community constantly tells me is that they care about regional Australia and that they care about rural Australia. They don't only care about their own patch. Across this parliament, we always need to be looking just outside our own patches and making sure that we don't try to create divisions between different parts of the country, but use opportunities to bring these together. I think that the work the member for Indi is doing in this is excellent, because what she's doing is saying, 'This transition will benefit the whole country.'</para>
<para>In my area, we don't have the capacity for the solar farms and the other changes required to power my area. We will get benefit from this, but we want to make sure that regional communities get benefits too. Otherwise, it will fall down. This is beyond asking for social licence; it's saying, 'Let's use this as an opportunity to bring real benefit to our communities and to build the next evolution of our thriving regional communities.'</para>
<para>I thank the government for supporting these amendments and I urge it to consider the other very useful amendments the member has put forward, because I think this is about building community engagement across the country in this absolutely vital change.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr HAINES</name>
    <name.id>282335</name.id>
    <electorate>Indi</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(9) Clause 16, page 18 (lines 3 to 6), omit subclause (2), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) In performing the Authority's functions, the Authority should prioritise communities, regions, industries and workers that are or will be:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) in areas recognised by the Australian Energy Market Operator as renewable energy zones; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) otherwise significantly affected by Australia's transition to a net zero emissions economy.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(10) Page 21 (after line 28), after clause 19, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">19A Board must prepare annual work plan</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) The Board must prepare and give to the Minister a work plan, in writing, for each financial year beginning on or after the commencement of this Act.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) The work plan for a financial year must set out:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the main activities proposed to be undertaken by the Authority and the Board for the financial year and for the following 2 financial years, including activities relating to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) the scheme prescribed for the purposes of section 68AD (the developer rating scheme); and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) local energy hubs (see Part 5B); and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iii) community benefit plans (see Part 5C);</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) how those activities are proposed to be undertaken.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note: For example, the work plan could include the following activities relating to Australia's transition to a net zero emissions economy:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) capacity building in regions to guide future economic development;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) working with State-based regional transition authorities on particular activities;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) funding and facilitating the development and delivery of regional strategies to improve economic diversification.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Consultation on a draft work plan</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Before giving the Minister a work plan for a financial year, the Board must:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) prepare a draft of the work plan and give it to the Minister, the States, the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) cause the draft work plan to be published on the Department's website; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) invite all interested bodies or persons to give the Authority written comments on the draft work plan within:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) 90 days after the invitation is given; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) such longer period as advised by the Authority.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The Board may also consult with any other person that the Board considers appropriate about the draft work plan.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) In preparing a work plan for a financial year, the Board must have regard to any comments given under paragraph (3)(c) in relation to the draft of the work plan.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Tabling and publishing a work plan</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) The Minister must table each work plan in each House of the Parliament within 7 sitting days of that House after receiving the work plan under subsection (1).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) The Board must cause each work plan to be published on the Department's website as soon as practicable after giving it to the Minister.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(7) A work plan prepared under subsection (1) is not a legislative instrument.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(11) Clause 20, page 22 (after line 16), at the end of the clause, add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) A direction under subsection (1) must be consistent with this Act (including the object of this Act), with the Board's functions and with the Authority's functions.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(16) Clause 69, page 68 (line 5), after "including", insert "the Authority's budget".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(17) Page 69 (before line 2), before clause 70, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">69A Minimum 10-year budget for the Authority</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) If, by the end of the 6-month period beginning on the day this Act commences, no Commonwealth law sets out a budget for the Authority for each of the first 10 financial years starting on or after that commencement, the Minister must cause to be prepared a written report explaining the reasons why.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) The Minister must table the report in each House of the Parliament within 7 sitting days of that House after the end of that 6-month period.</para></quote>
<para>These amendments really should be noncontroversial. These amendments are housekeeping, actually. They require the authority to undertake an annual work plan. That's good practice. These are sensible, non-controversial amendments. It's what the government 's owner Jobs and Skills Australia does so the public knows what the work is that this taxpayer funded body actually does.</para>
<para>These amendments require a long-term budget for the authority. Again, this isn't a first-time idea. The Australian Renewable Energy Agency, the Clean Energy Finance Corporation and the National Reconstruction Fund all have legislated budgets. I would argue that, if the authority is such an important pillar in our transition to net zero, it should be guaranteed funding for 10 years. I understand that this government has a strong ambition for the Net Zero Economy Authority. We're coming into an election period. Who's to say who will be the next government? I would say to this government: Lock it in. Make sure that the Net Zero Economy Authority is set up to succeed, whoever is sitting in that chair.</para>
<para>These amendments would also ensure that the authority supports communities in renewable energy zones. This really is just so obvious to me. If we have a renewable energy zone determined in an area, this bill should apply to people in that area. It's a really obvious but important amendment. The government like to talk about these renewable energy zones. They talk about them frequently. These are the areas across regional Australia that the Australian Energy Market Operator has identified as renewable-rich areas with the right infrastructure and transmission. There are two of them in my electorate. But residents in my electorate and others like it are not having a REZ explained to them at all. I really can't believe there's not one mention of renewable energy zones in a bill whose objects include 'facilitating the achievement of Australia's greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets' and 'ensuring Australia's regions and workers are supported in relation to, and benefit from, Australia's transition to a net zero emissions economy'. If REZs aren't in the bill, then I ask the government: what do you think their role is in the net zero economy? I ask that with great conviction.</para>
<para>My amendments add a provision which ensures that the minister's directions to the authority must not contradict the objects of the bill. Again, this is really tight housekeeping that future-proofs and protects this bill. It feels like an obvious amendment to me.</para>
<para>The transition to a future powered by clean energy is going to take more than a couple of election cycles. We must ensure that the authority is used for its intended purpose and is not used as a vehicle to pursue political aims. I hope people are listening at home, because we have seen this happen before. I don't want to see that record played over again. Quite frankly, I don't. I want to see this authority set up for the long term and to succeed.</para>
<para>Finally, I want to thank those individuals and organisations that have made such fulsome contributions to the Senate inquiry on this bill. Many of these have informed the amendments that I have put to the parliament today. One of the great joys of being an independent is to be able to look at those submissions really carefully and to engage with the community that I represent and to engage with civil society organisations who are really interested in good policy. So, in particular, I want to thank the RE-Alliance group, the Grattan Institute, the Australian Institute, the Australian Council of Social Service and Next Economy. I urge the government: do your housekeeping. I urge them to support these very sensible and modest amendments.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GORMAN</name>
    <name.id>74519</name.id>
    <electorate>Perth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>With regard to the annual work plan, it's the government's view that the Net Zero Economy Authority Bill already has a requirement to publish and table the corporate plan in this parliament every year. That's a requirement related to the authority that sits under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 and is the appropriate way in which to outline the work of the authority in this place.</para>
<para>With regard to a budget, the government does not support that proposal. We think the normal practice of government agencies to be funded through an annual appropriation bill is the appropriate way to resource this authority. It ensures appropriate parliamentary scrutiny and appropriate scrutiny at Senate estimates hearings, which are happening in the other place right now.</para>
<para>With regard to some of the examples that have been raised around the appropriations given for the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, I think it's worth noting that that's only for the money they invest, not for their operational funding. With regard to operational funding, the budget that has just been delivered by the Treasurer provides $265.9 million over the forwards to ensure the operation of this authority.</para>
<para>With regard to some of the other matters that the member has just raised, I refer to clause 16(1)(b), which talks about the facilitation of public and private sector participation and some of those coordination matters that cut across the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility, the Regional Investment Corporation, the National Reconstruction Fund Corporation, the Export Finance and Insurance Corporation, the Australian Renewable Energy Agency, and Housing Australia, which will do a lot of the work that the member has just outlined she is keen to see done—as am I—in a way that is with and for regional communities across this country, not to them. That is definitely the government's intent, and I think this bill delivers on that.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr HAINES</name>
    <name.id>282335</name.id>
    <electorate>Indi</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I will put a question to the assistant minister in regard to the work plans and your explanation that there will be corporate plans. My experience with corporate plans in my life prior to arriving here was that the corporate plan does not go to the detail that a work plan does, and I'm curious about how the government will be able to monitor and track the activities of what is a brand-new agency and ensure that the intentions and objects of the bill are actually carried out.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GORMAN</name>
    <name.id>74519</name.id>
    <electorate>Perth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The corporate plan will be tabled in the parliament, so how it chooses to deal with the papers as they are tabled will be up to the parliament.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question before the House is that the amendments moved by the honourable member for Indi be agreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [17:40]<br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>8</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Chaney, K. E.</name>
                  <name>Daniel, Z.</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z.</name>
                  <name>Tink, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Wilkie, A. D.</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>29</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Belyea, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Burnell, M. P.</name>
                  <name>Chesters, L. M.</name>
                  <name>Claydon, S. C.</name>
                  <name>Doyle, M. J. J.</name>
                  <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Entsch, W. G.</name>
                  <name>Fletcher, P. W.</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P.</name>
                  <name>Hill, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Leigh, A. K.</name>
                  <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                  <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Mulino, D.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, E. L.</name>
                  <name>Payne, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Perrett, G. D.</name>
                  <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Smith, D. P. B. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Vasta, R. X.</name>
                  <name>Watts, T. G.</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>17:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STEGGALL</name>
    <name.id>175696</name.id>
    <electorate>Warringah</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move amendments (1) to (18) as circulated in my name:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Clause 4, page 3 (line 24), omit "or a gas-fired power station", substitute ", gas-fired power station or other relevant facility or business".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Clause 5, page 8 (after line 11), after the definition of <inline font-style="italic">national security information</inline>, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">net zero emissions economy</inline> means an Australian economy where:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) Australia's absolute greenhouse gas emissions have been significantly reduced to zero or to a residual level consistent with global efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5℃ above industrial levels in accordance with Articles 2 and 4 of the Paris Agreement; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) any residual Australian greenhouse gas emissions are neutralised by, and continue to be neutralised after, the net zero target date.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">net zero target date</inline> means the target date set out in paragraph 10(1)(b) of the <inline font-style="italic">Climate Change Act 2022</inline> for Australia's net greenhouse gas emissions to reduce to zero.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Clause 6, page 10 (after line 23), after subclause (2), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2A) An employer is also a <inline font-style="italic">closing employer</inline> if:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the employer:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) is a constitutional corporation; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) owns (whether alone or jointly) or operates (whether alone or jointly) one or more parts of a facility that is a designated large facility for the purposes of the <inline font-style="italic">National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act 2007</inline> for a financial year;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">whether or not the employer employs employees to perform work at the facility; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the employer is a constitutional corporation that owns (whether alone or jointly) or operates (whether alone or jointly) one or more parts of a business specified in a determination under subsection (2B).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2B) The Minister may, on recommendation by the Authority, determine in writing one or more classes of businesses for the purposes of paragraph (2A)(b).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2C) The Minister must cause a copy of the determination (including as varied) to be published on the Authority's website.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2D) A determination under subsection (2B) is not a legislative instrument.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2E) The Authority may, by notifiable instrument, make recommendations for the purposes of subsection (2B).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) Clause 6, page 11 (after line 19), after subclause (4), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4A) An employer is also a <inline font-style="italic">dependent employer</inline> if the employer (the <inline font-style="italic">relevant employer</inline>):</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) is a constitutional corporation; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) has a commercial relationship with:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) a closing employer within the meaning of subsection (2A); or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) an associated entity of such a closing employer; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) will, or will be likely to, cease a substantial part of the operations carried on by the relevant employer at the facility or business concerned, or in the same geographic area in which the facility or business concerned is located, as a direct result of the eventual closure of that facility or business.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) Clause 7, page 12 (after line 26), after subclause (2), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2A) A <inline font-style="italic">transition employee</inline>, of a closing employer within the meaning of subsection 6(2A), is an employee of the closing employer who is employed to perform work at the facility or business concerned.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) Clause 7, page 13 (after line 5), at the end of the clause, add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) A <inline font-style="italic">transition employee</inline>, of a dependent employer within the meaning of subsection 6(4A), is an employee of the dependent employer who is employed to perform work in the operations that will, or will be likely to, cease as mentioned in paragraph 6(4A)(c).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(7) Clause 9, page 13 (line 21), omit "or a gas-fired power station", substitute ", gas-fired power station or other relevant facility or business referred to in subsection 6(2A)".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(8) Clause 9, page 13 (line 26), omit "or a gas-fired power station", substitute ", gas-fired power station or other relevant facility or business referred to in subsection 6(2A)".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(9) Clause 16, page 17 (after line 15), after paragraph (1)(b), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ba) with the Climate Change Authority and in consultation with industry, communities and the public and private sector—to proactively plan, coordinate and advise on the phasing out of fossil fuels, including their exploration, extraction and export and their use in Australia;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(10) Clause 16, page 18 (lines 3 to 6), omit subclause (2), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) In performing the Authority's functions, the Authority must have regard to the following principles:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the principle of prioritising communities, regions, industries and workers that are or will be:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) concerned with manufacturing, installing or maintaining equipment, appliances, vehicles or devices that consume fossil fuels; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) otherwise significantly affected by Australia's transition to a net zero emissions economy;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the principles of:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) economic efficiency; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) environmental effectiveness; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iii) equity; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iv) the public interest; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(v) the impact on households, businesses, workers and communities; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(vi) an effective global response to climate change; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(vii) consistency with Australia's foreign policy and trade objectives; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(viii) complying with Articles 2, 4, 8 and 12 of the Paris Agreement; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ix) boosting economic, employment and social benefits, including for rural and regional Australia; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(x) achieving the safeguard outcome in paragraph 3(2)(d) of the <inline font-style="italic">National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act 2007</inline>;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) any other principles that the Authority considers relevant.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">This subsection has effect subject to subsections (4) and (5).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(11) Clause 21, page 23 (line 5), omit "5", substitute "7".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(12) Clause 23, page 24 (after line 26), after paragraph (3)(f), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(fa) climate science;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(fb) engineering;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(13) Clause 54, page 40 (line 5), omit "or a gas-fired power station", substitute ", gas-fired power station or other relevant facility or business".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(14) Clause 55, page 42 (line 29), omit "or a gas-fired power station", substitute ", gas-fired power station or other relevant facility or business".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(15) Clause 56, page 43 (line 24), omit "or gas-fired power station", substitute ", gas-fired power station, facility or business".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(16) Clause 56, page 45 (line 2), after "power station", insert ", facility or business".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(17) Clause 57, page 47 (line 11), after "power station", insert ", facility or business".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(18) Clause 57, page 47 (line 25), after "power station", insert ", facility or business".</para></quote>
<para>These amendments, along with many that have been put forward by the crossbench, are seeking to improve this legislation. Earlier this week, I spoke on the Net Zero Economy Authority Bill 2024, and today these amendments are trying to address the issues there are with that bill. As the bill currently stands, it has a narrow and hypertargeted scope that fails to provide the authority with what is necessary to genuinely support a net zero economy transition. This bill restricts the type of employer or worker that is afforded that just transition to support under the act, specifically limited only to those transitioning from coal- and gas-fired power stations.</para>
<para>In stark contrast to the broad objects of this bill, the operating provisions for worker transition are incredibly limited. Time and time again, members of the Labor government came into this place, talking about no worker being left behind. With respect, that is simply not true. The title of this bill is a shameless attempt to greenwash the effect of this bill. For all the rhetoric about leaving no-one behind in the transition and framing this bill as the Net Zero Economy Authority, the government is leaving many workers and industries behind—and regions, as the member for Indi has pointed out through her amendments. It's limited to helping approximately 5,000 workers, ignoring at least 110,000 others from export coal, oil and gas industries and ignoring a further 100,000-plus workers if we considers the mechanics, gas fitters and other geographically dispersed but emissions-intensive industries that will be subject to transition and that could also be supported by this authority. Even members of the government, like the member for Newcastle, identified that the bill will neglect almost 90 per cent of coalmine workers in the Hunter. The Hunter Jobs Alliance highlights that, in that region alone, an additional 2,600 workers between now and 2030 will be affected by coalmine closures, yet they do not get the benefit of a jobs plan or the real powers for the authority in this bill. The bill should be broadened to include workers who are part of emissions-intensive industries. Examples include gas networks or gas supply and manufacturing businesses, and mechanics for fossil-fuel-powered vehicles. Or, at the very least, the bill should include a mechanism to broaden the scope of powers of the authority to include more workers.</para>
<para>It's not only for workers that this bill is too narrow. The bill currently outlines a Net Zero Economy Authority with wide, overarching objectives. It is critical that these functions are not just aspirational but that they are actually achievable and have teeth or powers associated. It's crucial that the authority is mandated to proactively plan, coordinate and advise on the phase-out of fossil fuels, including their exploration and extraction for export as well as domestic use—something the government seems to remain in denial about. It will acknowledge closure of fossil-fuel energy plants, but it will not acknowledge the likely and very real closure of fossil-fuel export industries.</para>
<para>Independence is also an essential to achieve the goals and for the public to have confidence in how we transform our economy. So the independent body and the board of this new authority must be independent and made up of people with the right mix of expertise and experience. In that respect, I note a number of amendments have been made by members on the crossbenches, again seeking to improve this legislation, but these have not been taken up by the government. At the moment, ironically and quite extraordinarily, this bill doesn't require a board member to have climate or engineering experience, and yet it is a body that's said to be delivering a net zero economy. Without even having that kind of experience, it's hard to imagine that this board will in fact be fit for purpose to meet the very broad and aspirational challenge that it has been set. I would ask the government to rethink the approach. It needs to consider amendments that will enhance the recruitment of board members, ensure their independence and avoid captain's picks.</para>
<para>Finally, we still have the issue that there is good greenwashing in the title of this bill by calling it the Net Zero Economy Authority. Ironically, 'net zero' is still not defined, and I've had discussions with the assistant minister in this respect. The difficulty we have is that there are a lot of other industries that come into play, particularly carbon capture and storage. So it is important to start defining net zero to ensure we don't have industries involved that are not really in the purview of this authority.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GORMAN</name>
    <name.id>74519</name.id>
    <electorate>Perth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'll start by noting to the member for Warringah that provisions in the bill as it stands in front of us right now are that the Net Zero Economy Authority will be able to create advisory boards, where the board sees fit, for further advice on a range of things that have been mentioned in her contribution just now. When it comes to changes to the principles and adding additional principles to the bill, we believe that the objects of the act are clearly articulated in clause 3 of the bill, including promoting an orderly and positive economic transformation, facilitating the achievement of Australia's greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets and ensuring Australia's regions and workers are supported and benefit from the transition. We believe that's very clearly outlined in the bill as it stands.</para>
<para>With regard to the definition of net zero, we do not support this amendment. The bill currently refers to Australia's greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets and our obligations under the Paris Agreement. The Paris Agreement sets a long-term goal of achieving a balance between 'emissions by sources and sinks of greenhouse gases in the second half of this century'. This is an established and widely accepted characterisation of net zero and, indeed, the one that has been accepted in other bills that have been passed through this House, voted on and voted for by those in the government and those from the crossbenches. We believe that it would create unnecessary confusion if it were to be interpreted in a different way to existing Commonwealth acts, and so we do not support that change.</para>
<para>With regard to the scope of worker supports, I note that, under clause 16(c), the authority will have a broad function to support workers in emissions-intensive industries who are or will be affected by Australia's transition to a net zero emissions economy. The energy industry jobs plan in part 5 of the bill is just one of a number of ways that the authority can do this. I'd also like to note and point out that, for people who are looking to retrain, change their skills, shift from industry to industry, or change their work, this government has already implemented a number of supports, including the work that we've done through Workforce Australia, through new energy apprenticeships and through the comprehensive fee-free TAFE programs that we've outlined.</para>
<para>We also note that, with regard to some of the functions the member has outlined, there are some parts of that work that do appropriately sit with other agencies, such as with the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water. And I've addressed quite comprehensively the government's views on the composition of the board, so I won't add more there.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STEGGALL</name>
    <name.id>175696</name.id>
    <electorate>Warringah</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Noting the assistant minister's comments, I want clarification in some aspects. You state that the provision to provide plans or create boards in relation to those other areas is already included in the bill. Could you identify the section of the bill that in fact provides that, because, in relation to jobs plans or employment plans, that is very clearly limited to part 5? Noting earlier comments in relation to the review provision in 12 months, it is limited only to that section. It states 'review into the operation of this part', and it's only that part, which is the operation of gas and coal powered plants. My understanding is that that is very limited, so I have not identified that there are broader powers in the remaining sections of this bill. I would further ask the minister to confirm that currently only approximately 5,000 workers will be covered by the energy industry jobs plan and that in fact over 100,000 coal, oil and gas workers are excluded from that jobs plan.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GORMAN</name>
    <name.id>74519</name.id>
    <electorate>Perth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Very briefly, I refer the member to section 16(b), section 16(c), section 16(d) and section 16(e).</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that the amendments moved by the honourable member for Warringah, amendments (1) to (18), be agreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [17:56] <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>Chaney, K. E.</name>
                  <name>Daniel, Z.</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Tink, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                  <name>Wilkie, A. D.</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>36</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Ananda-Rajah, M.</name>
                  <name>Belyea, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Burnell, M. P.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Charlton, A. H. G.</name>
                  <name>Claydon, S. C.</name>
                  <name>Doyle, M. J. J.</name>
                  <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Entsch, W. G.</name>
                  <name>Fernando, C.</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P.</name>
                  <name>Gosling, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Hill, J. C.</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>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Mulino, D.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, E. L.</name>
                  <name>Payne, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Perrett, G. D.</name>
                  <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                  <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                  <name>Smith, D. P. B. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Watts, T. G.</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>17:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STEGGALL</name>
    <name.id>175696</name.id>
    <electorate>Warringah</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move amendments (1) to (18) on sheet 2, as circulated in my name, together:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Clause 4, page 3 (line 24), omit "or a gas-fired power station", substitute ", gas-fired power station or other relevant facility or business".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Clause 5, page 8 (after line 11), after the definition of <inline font-style="italic">national security information</inline>, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">net zero emissions economy</inline> means an Australian economy where:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) Australia's absolute greenhouse gas emissions have been significantly reduced to zero or to a residual level consistent with global efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5℃ above industrial levels in accordance with Articles 2 and 4 of the Paris Agreement; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) any residual Australian greenhouse gas emissions are neutralised by, and continue to be neutralised after, the net zero target date.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">net zero target date</inline> means the target date set out in paragraph 10(1)(b) of the <inline font-style="italic">Climate Change Act 2022</inline> for Australia's net greenhouse gas emissions to reduce to zero.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Clause 6, page 10 (after line 23), after subclause (2), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2A) An employer is also a <inline font-style="italic">closing employer</inline> if:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the employer:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) is a constitutional corporation; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) owns (whether alone or jointly) or operates (whether alone or jointly) one or more parts of a facility that is a designated large facility for the purposes of the <inline font-style="italic">National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act 2007</inline> for a financial year;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">whether or not the employer employs employees to perform work at the facility; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the employer is a constitutional corporation that owns (whether alone or jointly) or operates (whether alone or jointly) one or more parts of a business specified in a determination under subsection (2B).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2B) The Minister may, on recommendation by the Authority, determine in writing one or more classes of businesses for the purposes of paragraph (2A)(b).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2C) The Minister must cause a copy of the determination (including as varied) to be published on the Authority's website.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2D) A determination under subsection (2B) is not a legislative instrument.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2E) The Authority may, by notifiable instrument, make recommendations for the purposes of subsection (2B).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) Clause 6, page 11 (after line 19), after subclause (4), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4A) An employer is also a <inline font-style="italic">dependent employer</inline> if the employer (the <inline font-style="italic">relevant employer</inline>):</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) is a constitutional corporation; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) has a commercial relationship with:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) a closing employer within the meaning of subsection (2A); or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) an associated entity of such a closing employer; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) will, or will be likely to, cease a substantial part of the operations carried on by the relevant employer at the facility or business concerned, or in the same geographic area in which the facility or business concerned is located, as a direct result of the eventual closure of that facility or business.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) Clause 7, page 12 (after line 26), after subclause (2), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2A) A <inline font-style="italic">transition employee</inline>, of a closing employer within the meaning of subsection 6(2A), is an employee of the closing employer who is employed to perform work at the facility or business concerned.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) Clause 7, page 13 (after line 5), at the end of the clause, add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) A <inline font-style="italic">transition employee</inline>, of a dependent employer within the meaning of subsection 6(4A), is an employee of the dependent employer who is employed to perform work in the operations that will, or will be likely to, cease as mentioned in paragraph 6(4A)(c).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(7) Clause 9, page 13 (line 21), omit "or a gas-fired power station", substitute ", gas-fired power station or other relevant facility or business referred to in subsection 6(2A)".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(8) Clause 9, page 13 (line 26), omit "or a gas-fired power station", substitute ", gas-fired power station or other relevant facility or business referred to in subsection 6(2A)".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(9) Clause 16, page 17 (after line 15), after paragraph (1)(b), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ba) with the Climate Change Authority and in consultation with industry, communities and the public and private sector—to proactively plan, coordinate and advise on the phasing out of fossil fuels, including their exploration, extraction and export and their use in Australia;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(10) Clause 16, page 18 (lines 3 to 6), omit subclause (2), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) In performing the Authority's functions, the Authority must have regard to the following principles:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the principle of prioritising communities, regions, industries and workers that are or will be:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) concerned with manufacturing, installing or maintaining equipment, appliances, vehicles or devices that consume fossil fuels; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) otherwise significantly affected by Australia's transition to a net zero emissions economy;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the principles of:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) economic efficiency; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) environmental effectiveness; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iii) equity; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iv) the public interest; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(v) the impact on households, businesses, workers and communities; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(vi) an effective global response to climate change; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(vii) consistency with Australia's foreign policy and trade objectives; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(viii) complying with Articles 2, 4, 8 and 12 of the Paris Agreement; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ix) boosting economic, employment and social benefits, including for rural and regional Australia; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(x) achieving the safeguard outcome in paragraph 3(2)(d) of the <inline font-style="italic">National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act 2007</inline>;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) any other principles that the Authority considers relevant.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">This subsection has effect subject to subsections (4) and (5).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(11) Clause 21, page 23 (line 5), omit "5", substitute "7".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(12) Clause 23, page 24 (after line 26), after paragraph (3)(f), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(fa) climate science;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(fb) engineering;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(13) Clause 54, page 40 (line 5), omit "or a gas-fired power station", substitute ", gas-fired power station or other relevant facility or business".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(14) Clause 55, page 42 (line 29), omit "or a gas-fired power station", substitute ", gas-fired power station or other relevant facility or business".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(15) Clause 56, page 43 (line 24), omit "or gas-fired power station", substitute ", gas-fired power station, facility or business".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(16) Clause 56, page 45 (line 2), after "power station", insert ", facility or business".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(17) Clause 57, page 47 (line 11), after "power station", insert ", facility or business".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(18) Clause 57, page 47 (line 25), after "power station", insert ", facility or business".</para></quote>
<para>I'm actually disappointed that I need to move these amendments. When we look at the consideration in detail of this bill, where many on the crossbench have attempted to improve the effect and powers of the Net Zero Economy Authority, alleged, under this bill, it's clear that the government is still very limited and very blinkered with regard to which industries and which specific workers it's willing to help.</para>
<para>That's why I moved my amendments. They will amend the name of this bill to what it in fact is: the 'coal and gas-fired worker transition authority' bill. It's necessary for the government to be very clear and not to mislead people and communities as to the very limited extent of support that its bill offers. Coalmining communities, such as those in the Hunter and in other areas around Australia, that work in mines where the product is for export, might be mistaken in thinking that a just transition would be afforded to them under this bill. That's not the case, and that needs to be made clear. This House has not voted to accept amendments moved by many here that would provide a mechanism to do that or, at the very least, a mechanism to ensure it's possible within the powers of the authority to do it—or even that it would be within the terms of review, to broaden the scope and powers of the authority over time. Then it would be in keeping with the alleged name 'Net Zero Economy Authority'.</para>
<para>Instead, we have seen industries, especially those that we know will phase out as a result of the transition to a low-carbon economy, left out. We know that our economy is changing, that it needs to and that it needs to change fast. In fact, we need to put an end to coal and gas. We need no new coal and gas; we need to end those export industries and transition to others. The first step in that is recognising it. The year 2023 was the first where temperatures on land exceeded two degrees above pre-industrial levels. Joel Gergis' quarterly essay named 'Highway to Hell: Climate Change and Australia's Future' outlines a grim scientific account of what we are facing. Transition will, and must, occur, and we need to support our economy, communities and workers in doing so. The International Energy Agency forecasts that the world is decarbonising, that our trading partners are decarbonising and that the demand for our fossil fuels is going to change and decline, so we need to address this and assist those communities. It would be remiss only to pick, narrowly, a few winners—a few communities which deserve the power of the authority and not others. That's why, reluctantly, we need to ensure that this bill is only directed to those who it's actually empowered to assist. It will not impact many others in the fossil fuel industries who will be impacted by the transition to net zero.</para>
<para>We see a lot of greenwashing across a lot of industries,. The use of the term, 'net zero' is a nice phrase. It rings, and makes people reading it think that it's addressing a very specific thing. I know there's a very real reason why the government drafters used that term in the name of this authority, and that's why I've moved these amendments to change it. I think we need to be really clear that a net zero economy is much broader than just coal and gas workers in the fossil fuel energy industry. If we're genuinely going to say that it's a net zero economy, it must be much broader. That's why I have moved these amendments, to ensure that we don't leave anyone behind. I want to make sure that no-one is misled by the title of this bill; that it's in fact very clear and that communities know the importance of the terminology 'net zero'. There's a growing awareness about this, and they know that the use of the term is also associated with much greenwashing. We need to make sure that consistency and climate commitment are attached to the term.</para>
<para>In the absence of broadening the scope of the authority to provide work plans which address the other industries that will be impacted by the net zero transition, it's necessary to call a spade a spade and to say that the operating provisions of this act should be reflected in its name. This is why I have moved these amendments.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GORMAN</name>
    <name.id>74519</name.id>
    <electorate>Perth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The government does not accept the proposed amendments. Indeed, to accept them would be to mislead about the intent of this bill or the provisions within it. We have just spent almost two hours considering this bill in detail. I have stood here and outlined the broad powers that sit within the Net Zero Economy Authority. If we were to accept this change, which in my view talks down to workers in a range of essential industries for our economy, it would not reflect the bill that is in front of us. It would not reflect the ambitions that the government has for this authority and it would not reflect the expectations of this parliament, who I hope will soon vote for this bill. It would not reflect our ambitions for what that authority needs to go on and do.</para>
<para>I outlined the powers in section 16 and I outlined the hundreds of millions of dollars the government has put in the budget for this authority to do all of that work, so to simply try and divide Australians by saying, 'This is just for a small section of workers,' is completely wrong. The amendment would not reflect the bill as it is on the table right there, and I would urge the member for Warringah—who I know comes and does, as I seek to, raise the standard of political debate—that I don't think that this is an appropriate way to raise the standard of political debate. It narrows the title of the bill and it narrows the title of the authority in a way that actually doesn't reflect the work that it will do. I agree with the Member for Warringah when she says it's time to stand up for integrity and accountability and restore trust in Australian politics. This change would not do that.</para>
<para>I know that the Member for Warringah has done a lot of work when it comes to increasing accountability for those of us elected to parliament and when it comes to integrity in political advertising. In my view, it would be a lie in terms of what this authority does if we were to change it to this name. It's so much bigger in scope. The transformation is so much bigger than the simple title change that's proposed. The government doesn't support it and I don't think anyone in this parliament should.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STEGGALL</name>
    <name.id>175696</name.id>
    <electorate>Warringah</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I have a question for the assistant minister. If it is the intent of the government to generally have an authority that addresses an entire net zero economy transition—which means going broadly across a lot of areas—could the minister clarify why part 5, Energy Industry Jobs Plan, is limited in section 54 to only those relating to the closure of the whole or part of a coal-fired power station or gas-fired power station, and that is the only requirement to trigger the creation of an energy industry job plan?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GORMAN</name>
    <name.id>74519</name.id>
    <electorate>Perth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Part 5 is just one part of the bill. We've already outlined that section of the Energy Industry Jobs Plan will be reviewed in the first 365 days, should this parliament choose to pass the bill. For other matters in terms of why there is a focus on those immediate closures I'd refer the member to the impact analysis that's contained in the explanatory memorandum.</para>
<para>Question negatived.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that the bill, as amended, be agreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [18:12] <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>Burke, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Burnell, M. P.</name>
                  <name>Burney, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Burns, J.</name>
                  <name>Butler, M. C.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Chalmers, J. E.</name>
                  <name>Chandler-Mather, M.</name>
                  <name>Chaney, K. E.</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>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>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>Marles, R. D.</name>
                  <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                  <name>McBain, K. L.</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>Plibersek, T. J.</name>
                  <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                  <name>Reid, G. J.</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>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>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>Bell, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Boyce, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Buchholz, S.</name>
                  <name>Caldwell, C. M.</name>
                  <name>Chester, D. J.</name>
                  <name>Coleman, D. B.</name>
                  <name>Coulton, M. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Dutton, P. C.</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>Kennedy, S. P.</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>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>Wood, J. P.</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.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Third Reading</title>
            <page.no>73</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GORMAN</name>
    <name.id>74519</name.id>
    <electorate>Perth</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>Net Zero Economy Authority (Transitional Provisions) Bill 2024</title>
          <page.no>73</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="r7178" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Net Zero Economy Authority (Transitional Provisions) Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>73</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that the bill be read a second time.</para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [18:22]<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>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>Burke, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Burnell, M. P.</name>
                  <name>Burney, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Burns, J.</name>
                  <name>Butler, M. C.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Chalmers, J. E.</name>
                  <name>Chandler-Mather, M.</name>
                  <name>Chaney, K. E.</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>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>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>Marles, R. D.</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>Plibersek, T. J.</name>
                  <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                  <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Rishworth, A. L.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Rowland, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Shorten, W. R.</name>
                  <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                  <name>Smith, D. P. B.</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M. (Teller)</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>Bell, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Boyce, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Buchholz, S.</name>
                  <name>Caldwell, C. M.</name>
                  <name>Chester, D. J.</name>
                  <name>Coleman, D. B.</name>
                  <name>Coulton, M. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Dutton, P. C.</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>Kennedy, S. P.</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>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>Wood, J. P.</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. </p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Third Reading</title>
            <page.no>74</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GORMAN</name>
    <name.id>74519</name.id>
    <electorate>Perth</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>National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024</title>
          <page.no>74</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="r7181" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>74</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CHANEY</name>
    <name.id>300006</name.id>
    <electorate>Curtin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It seems appropriate that the new rule-making power requires the say of the states, given the system requires cooperation and buy-in from the states so people don't fall between the cracks. I'll support an amendment to embed the need for co-design and consultation in the development of this delegated legislation, and I'll also review this delegated legislation when it's made, consulting with disability organisations and supporting a disallowance if adequate consultation or co-design has not occurred.</para>
<para>A second concern relates to foundational supports. When we have 10 per cent of Australian boys between five and seven on the NDIS we need to look at different ways to address the issue. I have personal experience with my own kids. With an individualised approach it's on parents to access the NDIS, find the appropriate specialists, make appointments and get their kids to those appointments. If schools adequately catered for neurodiversity, our kids' ability to live up to their potential would be less dependent on parents. Building schools' capacity to deal with neurodiversity is no small matter. Over the last 10 years many block funded state support services have been withdrawn, leaving the NDIS as the only lifeboat in the harbour, as the minister puts it.</para>
<para>I can understand the concern that this bill is being passed without those foundational supports being in place. Rebuilding that capability will take time. People cannot be allowed to fall through the cracks. The minister assures me that the implementation schedule will reflect the preparedness of the states to step up in different areas. It will be important that there's transparency on the implementation progress of those foundational supports and that these supports are co-designed with people who have lived experience of disability—another thing the minister assures me will happen.</para>
<para>A third concern that's come up is the new needs assessment mechanism. The bill introduces mandatory functional assessments for all participants. As the scheme currently operates, there is a huge discrepancy in how support is provided to people. In some cases numerous individuals with similar needs are being provided with vastly different packages. Currently the size of your support plan can depend a lot on your ability to advocate. If you or your family or your support coordinator or plan manager are able to argue your case, you may get a better plan. Using a common functional assessment tool should ideally apply a consistent, commonsense approach. There is no one assessment tool for every disability. The minister has said there will be multiple assessment tools focused on the whole of the person, not just their diagnosis, and these will be developed in consultation with disability experts and advocates. These assessments will need to be based on the medical advice provided by experts and will need to be driven by clinical and functional need, not financial KPIs. It's not clear what qualifications these needs assessors will have or where they'll come from. It's also not yet clear what relationship the assessors will have with medical experts or how families will be involved in this assessment process, but these consent will be vital. This will be a significant challenge in implementation, and it's crucial the government builds trust in the new system by ensuring the workforce is well equipped to doing this role.</para>
<para>A fourth concern I have heard repeatedly that there's no merits-based review pathway with the new assessment process. The minister has told me that this bill has no impact on the review pathway available. The ability to challenge a reviewable decision based on its substance will still exist under section 100 of the NDIS act. A needs assessment will be an input to the statement of participant supports, which remains a reviewable decision. You will be able to see your support needs assessment and the budget outcome, including a draft; hopefully, this will mean that any concerns can be addressed at the draft stage rather than having to wait for the formal statement of participant supports and go through a formal challenge. I will be supporting amendments to require participants sign off on the draft plan and statement of supports to ensure that this is developed with the participant. But if you don't think the assessor has made the right call on the assessment that informed your statement of participant supports, you can seek internal and external review. In other words, you can still challenge your package through the Administrative Review Tribunal.</para>
<para>The fifth concern I've heard is that only limited types of supports will be available. Under this bill there was going to be a limited list of types of supports that could be funded. In response to evidence given at the Senate inquiry, the government has removed this with section 10 amendments, so now the same range of supports should be available as are currently available.</para>
<para>The sixth concern I've heard is that people want to be able to use unregistered providers to provide NDIS services because it gives them choice and control. Currently, NDIS recipients who self-manage their plans are usually not required to use registered providers. In fact, only nine per cent of providers receiving payments last year were registered. But there are growing concerns about the quality of care they provide patients. The government has absolutely no oversight on unregistered providers. Given that we're talking about some of the most vulnerable people in our community, it seems reasonable that providers should meet some minimum standards as long as the registration process, which is currently being reviewed, is not too onerous.</para>
<para>A seventh concern I've heard is in relation to accommodation. People who have been living alone in supported accommodation for a long time are now concerned that they'll no longer be eligible for that level of support, and may be forced to move into group accommodation. Some assurances have been given that this is not the intention. If delegated legislation is passed that's contrary to this, I'll be supporting its disallowance.</para>
<para>The final key concern I've heard is in relation to change-of-circumstance top-ups. There will always be a need to top-up plans when circumstances have changed, but at the moment we're spending $3.4 billion a year on top-ups when plans have already been fully spent before the end of the year. This is not a sustainable situation, and there is evidence that the system is being abused. The department tells me that there are currently twice as many of these applications as last year, and about three-quarters of these participants don't even know that a change has been lodged on their behalf. Communication with participants has broken down. There seem to be plan managers working the system at the moment, with anecdotal evidence of people being told to spend all their money because they can apply for a top-up. We cannot run the NDIS like this. There will always be a need for a top-up when there are legitimate changes in circumstances, but this should be proven. The department is currently working through what the appropriate evidentiary burden should be for a change in circumstances. This will also require adding more specialisation in the agency so the people assessing the changes in circumstances have an understanding of the relevant disability.</para>
<para>I take all these concerns from constituents very seriously and have passed them on to the minister. I thank him for his genuine engagement on this legislation and his willingness to make some amendments to address constituent concerns and provide greater comfort on how this reform will be implemented. In conclusion, the NDIS is a good thing, but it needs to be sustainable. It is currently in need of reform both to make it sustainable and to put people with disabilities at the centre of decisions and to ensure common sense prevails. I appreciate the amendments agreed to and the assurances provided by the minister, and I will be watching implementation very carefully. If there are issues in implementation—and I suspect there will be, as with any reform of this size—I will continue to bring issues to the attention of the minister so that they can be addressed, and will support disallowance of delegated legislation if needed. The NDIS should be something that Australia is proud of, and I believe that it can be.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BYRNES</name>
    <name.id>299145</name.id>
    <electorate>Cunningham</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Like all good social and health reforms in this country, the NDIS was brought to life by a Labor government, back in 2013. Led by the now Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme, alongside people with disability, community organisations, advocates and governments, we worked hard together to make disability reform a reality. This bill, the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024, is legislative reform to return the NDIS to its original intent and improve the experience of Australians living with a disability as well as their families and carers. The NDIS once stood as one of the most life-changing reforms in our nation's history, serving as a beacon of support and empowerment for individuals living with disabilities and for their families. But, after a decade of decimation and neglect under those opposite, it is in desperate need of repair, and there is a lot of work to do.</para>
<para>This landmark program represents a fundamental change in how disability services are delivered, placing the power of decision-making into the hands of those who need it most. As of March 2024, the NDIS supports just under 650,000 adults and children nationally. In the electorate of Cunningham there are 3,808 adults and children with a disability, with many of these people receiving support for the very first time. For individuals living with disabilities, the NDIS should offer a lifeline of support, providing access to tailored services and supports that address their unique needs and aspirations. Whether it's assistance with daily activities, access to therapies and treatments or support to pursue education and employment goals, the NDIS should empower individuals to live life on their own terms, with dignity and independence. This bill represents a pivotal opportunity to address challenges the scheme has been facing head-on and to refine and fortify the NDIS.</para>
<para>I have been working with and for the community since before the introduction of the NDIS. Whilst I have seen the amazing impact the scheme can have on people's lives, I have also seen instances of neglect, exploitation and criminal behaviour, which have been allowed to flourish under those opposite. I meet with people who are struggling to get the services they need and those who are paying too much for the services they are receiving. The problems we have inherited are twofold: too many people receiving funding are being exploited, and many more are still struggling to access the NDIS. It is a delicate balance, but we must get it right.</para>
<para>Unfortunately, I've also heard of many cases where people feel that there is a profound lack of compassion and empathy from the NDIA. I have heard heartbreaking stories from many participants of the NDIS as they have told of the difficult and demeaning process of continually proving, year after year, that they are still disabled, or even of having to provide proof of life expectancy to ensure the services that are being provided will meet value for money. It is heartbreaking to see families and participants subjected to such traumatising and dehumanising requests when seeking the life-changing care that they desperately need. I urge the CEO of the NDIA to ensure that staff listen to participants and their families, and to make sure they are afforded the care, respect and support they deserve, and in a timely manner. I hope to see the agency resolve cases as quickly as possible, without losing empathy and compassion when dealing with some of our most vulnerable people. Too many of my constituents have been further traumatised by the processes, the delays and the treatment by the agency, and it is imperative that this stop. As a government, we should never be putting families or participants through this. These distressed and vulnerable families should not have to fight so hard. They should not have to go to such lengths for basic care and support.</para>
<para>I knew when we were first elected that it was going to be a huge job to fix all of the problems caused by a decade of neglect and laziness by the previous government. I commend the minister for taking on this tremendous task. I know the minister gets it, and my community knows this too. He understands the problems that we inherited and the huge task that it is to get the NDIS back on track.</para>
<para>This bill represents an effort to address the negligence of the previous government and ensure that the NDIS remains a strong and responsive system for individuals with disabilities across Australia. Through the proposed targeted reforms and improvements, as outlined in this bill, it aims to strengthen the NDIS and uphold its fundamental principles of empowerment, choice and inclusion for all participants.</para>
<para>An independent review of the NDIS commenced in October 2022. Over 12 months they heard from about 10,000 people, received just under 4,000 submissions, spoke with more than a thousand people with a disability and spent more than 2,000 hours listening to their stories, their ideas and their feedback. From this extensive consultation period, on 7 December 2023 the final report was released, making 26 recommendations with 139 actions to change the system so it will better support people with a disability. These recommendations, along with the integrated actions, form a blueprint on how the government can make the NDIS more inclusive and accessible for all Australians living with disability.</para>
<para>From the recommendations and actions, this bill will offer significantly improved clarity on who can access the NDIS. It will facilitate improved early intervention pathways for individuals with psychosocial disability and children under the age of nine experiencing developmental delays and disabilities. It will improve how NDIS participant budgets are set, making them more flexible and providing clear information on how they can be spent. It will also strengthen the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission.</para>
<para>The bill will provide clarity to all new participants who will be entering the NDIS, through the introduction of three new categories. The NDIA will be tasked with advising these new participants of their entry into the NDIS, which will be under one of three categories: the disability requirements, the new early intervention requirements or a combination of both. These new categories will not only aid in the assessment of the participant's future support needs but also ensure the establishment of a reasonable and necessary budget that is tailored to those needs and will provide clarity to healthcare providers, carers and participants. The NDIS amendment bill lays significant groundwork for the development of a new pathway for participants entering the NDIS through early intervention requirements.</para>
<para>The government has heard feedback about the proposed new definition of NDIS supports in the bill and is proposing to introduce amendments that, if adopted, will replace the definition of NDIS support currently in the bill to clarify it and make it more accessible. By changing the definition, it will provide more clarity around the supports that can be funded by the NDIS and those that cannot. With this proposed change, we are getting the NDIS back to its original intention, which is to provide support to people with significant and permanent disability and to people who are in need of early intervention supports. This proposed change is consistent with the recommendations of the independent review into the NDIS in that it focuses on the needs of a participant rather than a diagnosis. The new definition makes clear the constitutional basis for the new budget based planning framework recommended by the review and provides clarity and consistency across the entirety of the act.</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government is delivering on our commitment to build a stronger and more sustainable NDIS by providing a further $468 million to get the NDIS back on track. We are also investing $45.5 million to establish an NDIS Evidence Advisory Committee to build more evidence about what works for participants. This will ensure the supports provided under the scheme are beneficial, safe, evidence based and cost-effective. We are also investing $20 million to start preliminary consultation and design work to help people with disability navigate services. With close collaboration between people with disabilities, states, territories and key stakeholders, this will ensure that any proposed model is suitable and adaptable to the diverse needs of the disability community.</para>
<para>We've also committed $5.3 million to undertaking preliminary work to reform NDIS pricing arrangements to help ensure NDIS participants get a fair deal and to increase the transparency regarding how prices are set. There's also $213 million of recently announced funding to fight fraud and to co-design NDIS reforms with people with a disability. This investment builds on the $732.9 million provided in last year's budget. The government has already begun to take initial immediate steps in response to the historic review. This investment will provide the necessary framework needed to bring people with a disability together with government and other experts to support the implementation of the reforms.</para>
<para>The bill will usher in a new era of NDIS reforms that ensure the scheme can continue to provide life-changing outcomes for future generations of Australians with disability and to make sure that every dollar in the scheme gets to the participants for whom the scheme was designed. It will also bolster the power of the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission to protect participants from illegal and unethical conduct. This bill includes provisions to strengthen governance and oversight within the NDIS, aiming to enhance accountability and transparency in the management of funds and resources. This includes measures to clarify the roles and responsibilities of various stakeholders involved in the administration of the scheme, ensuring that resources are utilised efficiently and effectively to meet the needs of participants.</para>
<para>The NDIS amendment bill represents a commitment not just to fixing what is broken but to envisioning a more inclusive, responsive and resilient NDIS for the future. Today the NDIS is as much a part of our society's fabric as Medicare or superannuation. We have the responsibility to ensure that this scheme is putting people with a disability back at the centre of the NDIS, ensure that we restore trust and pride in the scheme and safeguard its sustainability for future generations.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr SCAMPS</name>
    <name.id>299623</name.id>
    <electorate>Mackellar</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise in support of the broad intention of the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024, but, after consultation with many in the disability community, I have significant concerns that there is the chance for unwanted and unintended consequences with this bill. It is well known that, since its introduction almost 11 years ago, the cost, structure and operation of the National Disability Insurance Scheme has become unsustainable. The NDIS has been stretched to its limits largely because it has expanded to provide services for conditions it was never intended to cover. It is generally agreed that something has to change, and this bill aims to start that process of change.</para>
<para>It is also well known that the NDIS has absolutely transformed the lives of hundreds of thousands of people with disabilities. It has been described as one of the most complex and ambitious pieces of public policy in the world. It is truly an example of progressive social and economic policy that this country can be proud of. Ensuring its continuation and sustainability should be one of our nation's top priorities.</para>
<para>I was pleased to see that, when this government was elected in 2022, it set about a process of understanding the problems with the NDIS. It commissioned a yearlong review, and the 329-page report of this review outlines 26 recommendations to be implemented over the next five years. Of the review's 26 recommendations, the very first was that the Australian government, along with the state and territory governments, should jointly invest in foundational disability supports, with particular investment in supports for children with disability and developmental concerns. This was recommended so that the NDIS would no longer be the sole source of disability support and, therefore, the federal government would no longer be the sole source of funding for it.</para>
<para>By way of a bit of background to this proposed change, when the NDIS was introduced, state and local governments gradually abandoned the vast majority of services they once provided to people with disability. Those services comprised what are known as 'foundational supports', and people were previously able to access those supports through local and state services without needing to apply to be a participant in the NDIS. Ten years on, however, the NDIS has had to completely take over responsibility for those foundational supports from the states and territories. This has contributed in a major way to the NDIS becoming unsustainable.</para>
<para>The recommendations stemming from the NDIS review aim to reverse this change and to make the state and federal systems work better together. Once the report was released, National Cabinet agreed that the states would double their annual contributions to the NDIS in return for the federal government paying for half of the foundational supports. As part of the restructured NDIS, these foundational supports would again be provided by state based institutions and systems, including schools, early childhood centres and health care. Then, in the first half of this year, the federal government set about drafting this first tranche of legislation, implementing the recommendations of the review, and this is the bill we're debating today.</para>
<para>But there are some very troubling things going on in the NDIS right now, even before this legislation has passed. My office is been swamped with pleas for help from desperate constituents. In addition to the well-known problems with the administration of the operation of the NDIS through the NDIA, resulting from a decade of neglect by the previous coalition government, this current government seems to have commenced already a process of slimming the NDIS down. This has taken the form of participants, including in my electorate of Mackellar, receiving letters from the government informing them that their participation in the scheme is going to be the subject of a review—not a review of their plan or the budget they receive but their eligibility to be a participant in the scheme at all.</para>
<para>Further, some letters go on to require specialist medical reports for the purpose of the review, to be provided within 28 days. Anyone who has had to receive specialist medical treatment lately would know it's barely possible to get an appointment, let alone a report, within 28 days. These letters have been received by families with members who are significantly and permanently disabled. To think that they could do the work necessary to participate in a full-scale eligibility review within 28 days is unthinkable, and extremely stressful for these people—terrifying, actually, to be told that within 28 days your child, your mother, your uncle or even you could be cut off from every support you currently receive. I urge the minister for the NDIS to look into these reports urgently, to ensure that no more Mackellar families, or families from around Australia, find themselves in this distressing situation.</para>
<para>But back to the bill. As I said at the outset, I support the intent of this legislation, because everyone agrees that something has to be done to keep the NDIS viable. But there is a raft of issues with it, expressed most emphatically and pertinently by the disability community. When the final report of the NDIS review was released, Disability Advocacy Network Australia, DANA, alongside other disability representative organisations, stated:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… continued access to support for people with disability is necessary and non-negotiable. Any changes to how support is provided, either inside or outside the Scheme, must not lead to any gaps in the support we receive.</para></quote>
<para>Unfortunately, in DANA's view, this legislation does not meet that stated imperative. It considers that it will potentially raise the cost of the NDIS and shut people out of vital support.</para>
<para>And DANA is far from alone. I mention them as one example of what has become a chorus of concern reaching out to my office. The fundamental complaint about the bill from disability advocates is that there is no way to assess the full impact of the proposed changes because so much of it will be contained in subsequent delegated legislation which is not yet drafted. This means that the federal minister and the states will have the power to develop crucial new elements. The government has also stated that it failed to legislate its intention to develop the detail of the bill in consultation with the community. The disability community is deeply troubled by this, and insists that meaningful codesign of changes is so important that it must be written into the primary legislation.</para>
<para>There are other, more detailed, complaints about the legislation which are common in the disability community. They include that there is a fundamental lack of capability within the NDIA to implement this bill and that it is built on untested assumptions of automation. When we say 'automation' here, we're not talking about a new computer system but a fundamental change to the foundations of the NDIS which introduces new processes and concepts not yet legislated that will impact over 600,000 participants, thousands of providers and hundreds of thousands of other people caught up in the NDIS ecosystem. More than one person with knowledge of both systems has compared what is now being proposed for the NDIS with the automation that underpinned robodebt.</para>
<para>Another concern is that the new needs assessment tool has no detail, and the disability community has again not yet been consulted. The tool will only assess disability, not medical needs, and the current proposal suggests that either an allied health professional or a social worker will conduct the needs assessment. Social workers have a crucial role in the disability ecosystem but are not qualified to be conducting needs assessments. There is also a significant and troubling change to the definition of 'reasonable and necessary' in the bill—a well-established core concept under the current NDIS legislation.</para>
<para>One of the most concerning areas of change is with the process to review participant rights and plans. This draft of the legislation makes it possible for participants to be cut off from the scheme if their plan is subject to a review and they (a) fail to provide requested information within 90 days or (b) fail to have a required medical assessment within 28 days of it being requested of them. I've already commented on the difficulties my constituents are having with this section of the bill even prior to it being passed. In addition, disability advocates are confused as to whether participants' plans will be reviewable or not, including the needs assessment, which forms the entire basis of participants' supports.</para>
<para>The states too are worried. Despite having struck a deal in December with federal government to fund foundational supports on a fifty-fifty basis, state premiers and territory chiefs consider that the changes proposed in this bill go further than what was agreed. In a joint letter to the minister just a couple of weeks ago, all the premiers and chief ministers said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The Bill will make immediate and fundamental changes to the way the NDIS operates, including how access to the Scheme is determined, how participant needs are assessed and how participant budgets are set.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">…   …   …</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">We are deeply concerned that this way of going about the reform—including through this Bill—will lead to worse outcomes for more Australians with disability and their families.</para></quote>
<para>In summary, I understand the need to reform the NDIS to make it sustainable, but I am concerned that this bill, as currently drafted, may have unintended consequences for participants. I would urge the government to hasten slowly, listen deeply to the concerns of the disability community and make sure we get this right. I would like at this moment to also thank the minister for his commitment to the NDIS and for his generous consultation with the crossbench. Thank you.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEMPLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>181810</name.id>
    <electorate>Macquarie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024. I want to reflect on what it was like for Australians with a disability and their families before the NDIS. Between 2010 and 2013, when the scheme was first being designed and began, I had many conversations about this. There was a lot of luck in whether you got support. Some of it was based on your postcode. For people in the periurban and outer west that I represent, that brought huge uncertainty and, for too many, poverty and disadvantage.</para>
<para>The 2009 report <inline font-style="italic">Shut out</inline> painted a grim picture. As the Minister for the NDIS described it, it painted a picture then of people with disability isolated and alone, their lives a constant struggle for resources and support. What he and fellow Labor minister Jenny Macklin recognised was that Australia needed a whole system of disability support and the NDIS for people with the most complex support needs. In the decade since it started, I think we can all say that the NDIS has made a profound difference to the way Australians think about disability and has changed this country for the better. But, in spite of its promise, the NDIS does not yet fully deliver the peace of mind that people with a disability and their families deserve.</para>
<para>One of the most powerful conversations I had prior to the introduction of the NDIS was with an older couple who told me about their son, in his 40s, with complex disabilities. They were all ageing, and their biggest fear was not being around to care for their son. It worries me that today I still hear too many families express the same concern. It's not always for the same reasons, but it is because of the complexity and challenge in interacting with the NDIS—that it can feel like combat when needs or circumstances change or that the NDIS asks year after year for people to prove that their lifelong disability still exists, as if a permanent disability will have suddenly disappeared. That is why securing the future of the NDIS is so important.</para>
<para>Our lives can change in an instant, and every Australian deserves the peace of mind of knowing that, if they or someone they love has or acquires a significant and permanent disability, the NDIS will be there for them. Our promise was to restore trust in the NDIS, and, in the two years we've been in office, I know the Minister for the NDIS has worked through a myriad of issues that we inherited. Some we knew of before coming to government, and others we've identified and refused to ignore. I'd like to acknowledge the work that has been done to date, including the slashing of the 4,500 legacy appeal cases at the Administrative Appeals Tribunal that had people in limbo for months if not years; the fact that more people with disability are being discharged from hospital onto the NDIS than waiting in beds when they are medically fit to go home; improvements to the board so there are now more people with lived experience and the first Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander board member; and the fact that we've tackled fraud, waste and overcharging because we want to see that every single dollar goes to better outcomes for participants.</para>
<para>The Fraud Fusion Taskforce has investigated more than 100 cases involving more than $1 billion of NDIS funding. We've upgraded rules to make it clear that equipment and services cannot be more expensive because they're being bought under an NDIS package, and a new taskforce working alongside the ACCC will help identify people who are price gouging. Of course this is not the majority of good, dedicated service providers who would never betray their NDIS participants or taxpayers with this bad behaviour. But we have to stop those who do. The independent review we undertook, with some of the most extensive consultation with Australians ever, made 26 recommendations to us, and this bill is just the start of a very long reform process. Any change will take years. The process of reform will take years. And I know that creates anxiety for people.</para>
<para>I recently sat down for a detailed discussion with a group of parents in Springwood who care for their children with support from the NDIS. The families have a range of care in place under their plans. Some are self-managed, others are with plan managers, some have adult kids who live with them and others are in supported independent care. Each has a unique mix of supports to create a rich individual life. They all had fears and frustrations, and I am grateful for their honesty and bravery in discussing what is working, what isn't working, their concerns about some of the elements in this legislation and what they were afraid might be changed.</para>
<para>Frustrations included having to fight for things like shoes. One family explained their son needed special shoes in order to walk, but shoes are deemed a regular life expense, so they had to demonstrate the need for the more expensive shoes, and a decision was made that they should be funded for one of those shoes. They told me about having to fight to keep funding for therapies and programs that have allowed physical or psychosocial improvements, because, while there is an improvement, it's only an improvement while the therapy or program is able to be accessed, and they fear that they might lose that funding. One family fears that a son who needs three people to move him might not be able to keep that support.</para>
<para>Although, of course, the review recognised and stated very clearly that sometimes participants can't share supports, it said they might need more support because they have higher individual needs or are in more complex circumstances. These are the fears that people have.</para>
<para>I know that, at the same time that participants and families want to see consistency, transparency and a fairer and more compassionate scheme, they are also worried about any loss of the complex care arrangements that they have fought really hard to put in place. I recognise that anytime we talk about changing the NDIS it's scary, but we have committed to engaging and consulting with people with disability and their families, their carers, representative organisations, service providers, unions and the broader community over the months and years that it will take to fulfil the potential of the NDIS. There is an enormous amount of work to do together to achieve it.</para>
<para>I want to thank the minister for acknowledging the nervousness and for his reassurance to people who, as he says, have battled hard to create an NDIS and to get their packages of support. His commitment is that we will work with you to make sure that people are getting the right support in the right way.</para>
<para>What we're speaking about here today is a bill which is best described as enabling architecture for the rules and future reforms to restore the original intent, integrity, consistency and transparency of the scheme that Labor created. One of the key elements is also the agreement by every state and territory that we work to ensure that the NDIS is not the only source of support for people with disability but that it is part of a larger ecosystem of supports. Certainly, in New South Wales over the last decade, I have seen state government funded supports in a whole range of things, from early childhood services and early intervention through to allied health services and psychosocial programs, closed down and withdrawn. If you weren't eligible for the NDIS, it meant you were left with nothing, which was never meant to be the situation. That will change only by working with the states in coming years.</para>
<para>I know that this bill has a journey to go through in this place and that there is live discussion, but, essentially, the getting the NDIS back on track bill is laying the foundation for implementing key review recommendations on planning and budget setting. It'll provide clarity on who can access the NDIS, it'll enable better early intervention pathways for people living with psychosocial disability and children younger than nine years old with developmental delay and disability, and it'll improve how NDIS participant budgets are set, making them more flexible and providing clear information on how they can be spent.</para>
<para>Rather than going through all the technical elements, let me focus on a couple of key points. 'Reasonable and necessary' remains the core basis on which support needs are met through the NDIS. There are no changes to 'reasonable and necessary' in this bill. The minister, in his second reading speech, also addressed some rumours head-on, and I think it's worth quoting his words:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… (1) psychosocial disability is still included in the NDIS—full stop; (2) autism is still recognised as a disability—full stop …</para></quote>
<para>For the first time, this legislation will link to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Rather than reference a specific article of the convention, the definition requires the NDIS support to implement any of Australia's obligations under the convention.</para>
<para>Another change relates to the requirement to provide information for eligibility reassessment. We'll work with the disability community on the operating guidance on this matter. The minister has stressed that, while it's important for the CEO of the scheme to have the ability to request and receive information on participants, this will not result in people needing to re-prove their disability. But they or their nominee will need to communicate with the agency in a way that works best for the person on the scheme. Where there is a risk for a participant, including financial risk, with plan management arrangements, the agency will have responsibility to act.</para>
<para>This bill also includes amendments to provide greater flexibility for the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission in its compliance powers, which build on our comprehensive fraud reforms. These are not about the majority of providers who are good, trusted and ethical people and organisations. I'm privileged to have many of these in my own electorate of Macquarie. I see examples regularly of providers who go above and beyond their paid hours to advocate for or support people in their care with care and compassion. I thank them for that. Again I know that we need changes to make this system sustainable for you and that you are part of the NDIS being around not just for now but for the future.</para>
<para>There are many examples close to home for me. Recently, I was invited to give out awards to volunteers at not-for-profit Blue Mountains Food Services, who, along with providing the Meals on Wheels service to older Australians in their homes, run Ben's Cafe in Lawson and the in-home cook and connect program for NDIS participants. Not only have I eaten at Ben's Cafe and can attest to the great food but I also see the satisfaction it provides to the team and the skills they develop in food prep and front of house. I've spoken to participants in these programs and their parents, who all talk about the confidence they see develop in the kitchen. These are great examples of the NDIS done well.</para>
<para>But there are still those who are ripping off the scheme and using it to provide poor services at exorbitant rates or to not provide what they promised to at all. We will continue to up the ante for dodgy providers.</para>
<para>Finally, I know the registration element for all NDIS workers is unsettling for some families as much as it is for providers. Currently, only around nine per cent of providers are registered. We're waiting on the report of the NDIS Provider and Worker Registration Taskforce, led by lawyer and disability advocate Natalie Wade, to inform those decisions. But, for the immediate changes and those that will take longer to implement, the non-negotiable part for all of us is that these things have to be done in collaboration with people with disability. That doesn't mean just with the large advocates but also with those in my community who have invested so much in making the scheme work for them or are still trying to make it work for them or their loved one.</para>
<para>I'll continue to work closely with my community in airing their concerns and their worries as the reforms move forward in coming months and years. I know, like many MPs, that we don't always get to hear the good outcomes and we do tend to focus on the battles that we help families fight. But I am always grateful to hear the good stories, as I was at the weekend, when a father, who was meeting with me about something completely different, expressed his thanks for the scheme, which helps support his son. Like so many others, his son and, as a consequence, their family have experienced the transformational effects of the NDIS. We want that to continue for generations to come.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VIOLI</name>
    <name.id>300147</name.id>
    <electorate>Casey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The NDIS is changing the lives of more than 660,000 Australians, and the coalition has a strong record of support for the NDIS. The coalition is committed to a fully funded NDIS, and, for this reason, it needs to be sustainable to ensure it delivers for the many generations to come.</para>
<para>When the National Disability Insurance Scheme Act was passed in 2013, in the dying days of the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd government, we saw a complex and important social reform poorly designed and rushed to implementation for political reasons. One of the most profound problems with the scheme was that it allowed the states to walk away from providing key services to those with a disability. Unfortunately Labor underinvested in the NDIS when it was established, failing to invest in the unmet needs of people with disability. If we look at the numbers over the time of the NDIS, at the time it was established the government committed $1 billion over four years for the first stage of the scheme. In its first year, the NDIS was to provide care and support for up to 10,000 people with significant and permanent disability, increasing to 20,000 people from 2014-15.</para>
<para>This year the budget revealed federal and state government spending on the NDIS ballooned by 21 per cent in 23-24 to $44.3 billion—or $2.4 billion more than forecast—in last year's budget. The Commonwealth picks up about 70 per cent of the cost of the scheme. There was an additional $3 billion in cost write-ups over the forward estimates, which included a combination of spending on participants and government initiatives to reform the scheme. To put this in perspective, the NDIS costs the Commonwealth more than double what the entire PBS program does and three times the expense of JobSeeker payments. The only program more expensive is the aged pension.</para>
<para>The question is: how do we trust this minister to make the NDIS sustainable when he thinks paying $620,000 for a personal speechwriter is a good use of taxpayer money. Based on the 28 speeches on his ministerial website, this equates to $22,000 a speech. This speechwriter was hired by Services Australia for the minister and paid $620,000 over two years, and this is despite the department saying that they have the capacity to provide speechwriting services in-house. The deputy CEO of Services Australia said in Senate estimates, 'It comes down to a question of choice.' There are 201 media and communication staff members currently employed by Services Australia, two of whom are speechwriters. Services Australia officials confirmed its staff had not written any speeches for the minister in the past 12 months.</para>
<para>To assist with the sustainability of the NDIS, the coalition established the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission in 2018 to ensure the safety and quality of NDIS services. After it was established, the coalition made further enhancement to protect NDIS participants from harm, and provided an additional $92 million to resource the commission. The previous coalition government invested a record $157.8 billion dollars over four years to support more than half a million Australians living with disability.</para>
<para>This legislation we debate today is the first in a proposed series of bills that amend the NDIS Act 2013 in response to the findings and recommendations of the independent review into the National Disability Insurance Scheme. For years now, concerns have been raised in relation to the NDIS, its financial sustainability, fraud and eligibility criteria. The last coalition government did not tolerate the misuse of funds intended to support people with disability and had a zero tolerance approach to fraud. The NDIS fraud taskforce saw significant results in 2021, leading to the seizure of millions of dollars in cash and assets acquired by individuals through fraudulent activity, as well as the successful prosecution of criminals who have targeted the NDIS and its participants.</para>
<para>The National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024 will provide new, much needed definitions of disability supports and clarify the scope of valid supports appropriately funded under the NDIS. Recent reports have described how some NDIS participants are abusing the scheme and what they use taxpayer funds for. I had a message completely separate to this about an hour ago from a friend and constituent whose daughter's funding had been cut. He's frustrated, like many others, about those that misuse the program when those that really need it don't get access. The following cases are just some examples that have been before the AAT, arguing the case for reasonable and necessary claims: infrared saunas, almost 2½ thousand dollars for security cameras, a two-bedroom apartment for one resident, a water filtration system, a Thermomix, a car fridge and freezer, $30,000 to $40,000 to purchase a new motorhome, horseriding lessons, a swimming pool, singing lessons, ducted air conditioning, sexual therapy or sex workers and the cremation of a participant's emotional support rat. What is and what is not an NDIS support must not be so strict as to not allow a participant to explain why it is reasonable and necessary for a requested support to be funded. However, this does not mean anything you desire is an NDIS support.</para>
<para>The success of the proposed reforms will depend on a viable sector with quality providers. Without the other elements required to achieve that—addressing of workforce shortages, realistic and independent pricing, and a regulatory system that promotes quality and an even playing field—the risk of any reforms not being successful is heightened. Unfortunately, there seems to have been a lack of a co-design approach to developing the bill. It is unclear who has been consulted in its development. Some disability representative organisations were apparently consulted; however, nondisclosure agreements were put in place. The bill makes multiple references to co-design, yet it was not open for public consultation, which comes back to a lack of transparency, fairness, compassion and accountability which this bill is supposed to support.</para>
<para>The bill will provide a new assessment process for gaining entry into the NDIS by way of the two eligibility streams—early intervention and/or disability requirements—and will set out the manner in which an existing NDIS participant will transition from an old plan to a new plan. This makes participants very nervous. Coming up on two years of this government, timeframes and wait times for planned reviews have drastically blown out, with participants now regularly waiting more than six months for reviews. That's six months where participants are without support and families are in crisis. Most of the local NDIS inquiries into my office are about this very issue.</para>
<para>In my electorate of Casey, in 2023, we assisted 23 constituents with complex NDIS cases, where their plans were wrong, late or approved but delayed. That number has now increased by 50 per cent, and we are only halfway through 2024. The common issues that I hear about include: support coordinators who have tried numerous times to contact NDIS with no resolution; and NDIS call-centre staff advising callers to contact their MP or giving advice on how to contact the Ombudsman to make a complaint, which is completely unacceptable. Requests for plan reviews or change-of-circumstances reviews are taking way too long to process. Planning meetings are not happening within 21 days of funding being approved for new participants, so participants are being kept waiting for too long without the support services they have been approved for. Support coordinators are putting in request for funds before funds run out in a participant's current plan, and their plan ends up expiring without those funds being approved, leaving participants without their vital support services, and the process to seek approval for invoices for support provided under the expired plan is challenging and complicated.</para>
<para>I want to share some of the stories from my community so we understand that there are people behind these failures in the NDIS system. Emma, age 47, has a number of physical and psychological disabilities. She lodged a plan review request in November 2023 in anticipation of running out of funds. She has now exhausted all of the funds in her plan and is in urgent need of funds to allow her support worker to attend a court domestic violence matter with her. Hannah, age 39, is a quadriplegic and is wheelchair bound, and her mum relies on support workers to help every day. There are only enough funds to last three more weeks, but Hannah's plan does not expire until September. A review lodged in March has not been actioned yet.</para>
<para>Louise, aged 57, with a psychosocial disability, lodged an urgent plan reassessment in November 2023 to provide additional support hours for her worsening health. This request is still awaiting action from the planning team.</para>
<para>Simon, aged 42, with level 2 autism, was approved for NDIS in December 2023. He's still waiting for the planning meeting meant to happen within 21 days so that he can access the mental health support workers needed to assist him with coping with autism outbursts.</para>
<para>Lachlan, aged 69, waited several months for approval of a quote for an already-approved item in his plan: to replace his prosthetic leg.</para>
<para>I could continue to share more stories from my constituents. Time does not allow it, but I hope this highlights the need for reform. Hopefully, the minister spends less time getting expensive speechwriters and more time fixing the system.</para>
<para>There are also problems that I can see with the bill for which I think we need more investigation and clarification from the government. It is not clear from the bill what a participant can do if they do not agree with the outcome of the needs assessment. NDIA decisions are notorious for being inconsistent and variable. There doesn't appear to be an avenue for review in the new legislation. The review recommendations themselves contain numerous contentious recommendations. The drafting of the bill lacked an opportunity for consultation. This will mean that participants, their families and providers would be scrambling to have fair and equitable access to the scheme and supports they need.</para>
<para>The coalition will not oppose this bill in the House of Representatives, but we do voice our concerns and call on the government to release the modelling that has led to their conclusions here, including the cost of savings to be made by this legislation and also a detailed outline of the inevitable cuts that participants should expect as a result of the changes.</para>
<para>The Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee is conducting an inquiry into the bill and is due to report by 20 June 2024. We will of course reserve our final position on the bill until after the Senate inquiry is complete.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GEORGANAS</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
    <electorate>Adelaide</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In the less than two minutes that I have before adjournment, I just want to make a couple of points about the NDIS. I think many on this side of the House would agree with me. When I talk to people who have a disability, are on the NDIS and have services from the NDIS, the conversation has one common thread and there is one particular discussion that I hear from these people: 'Thank God for the NDIS. Because of the NDIS, I can now go out once a week to a particular outing,' or, 'Because of the NDIS, I can now have equipment that makes my life easier.' From listening to what's been said by the opposition and the experiences out there, we see that the NDIS, because of a Labor government, is delivering to thousands of people with a disability. That's not to say that it can't improve and that's not to say that we can't make it better and stronger. That's exactly what the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Bill 2024 is all about. This government is delivering on its commitment to strengthen the National Disability Insurance Scheme, to build it and to make it strong and sustainable. That is very important. We know that, back in March 2024, a couple of months ago, this government introduced legislation to this parliament to be able to do exactly that: to enable important changes that are necessary to change the NDIS, to strengthen it, to make it better and to provide better services to people with disabilities. This legislation will pave the way for improvements that put participants back at the heart of the NDIS and make sure that every taxpayer dollar in the scheme gets to the participants for whom the scheme was designed.</para>
<para>Debate interrupted.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>ADJOURNMENT</title>
        <page.no>84</page.no>
        <type>ADJOURNMENT</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs</title>
          <page.no>84</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CALDWELL</name>
    <name.id>306489</name.id>
    <electorate>Fadden</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Tonight I want to highlight the incompetent performance of the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs, well supported in his incompetence by the Minister for Home Affairs and, of course, the Prime Minister.</para>
<para>An opposition member: Five minutes won't be enough!</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CALDWELL</name>
    <name.id>306489</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Yes. My colleague has pointed out that five minutes may well not be enough to dive deeply into this depth of incompetence. But I thought we'd start the evening with just a small word game. Can someone tell me a five-letter word that keeps people safe? I know you're all thinking 'drone', but it's not a drone, because we learned this week that they're actually grounded; they're not supervising any criminals or potential criminals. We certainly know it's not 'Giles'. No, it's definitely not Giles. That is not a word that we would associate with keeping Australians safe. The five-letter word that we can rely on to keep Australians safe is 'Peter', surname Dutton.</para>
<para>At the next general election, Australians are going to be looking for competency in government, and they will look to the coalition. Australians, unfortunately, are shocked but increasingly unsurprised that this Labor government have placed the needs and priorities of foreign criminals ahead of their own. As a result of Labor's issuing of ministerial direction 99, dangerous criminals have been allowed to stay in our country. Direction 99 is one of the Prime Minister's own making, and the hapless minister for immigration is merely the guy holding the pen. The Prime Minister owns this debacle on direction 99, because it was his undertaking to the former prime minister of New Zealand Jacinda Ardern that led to the weakening of our laws. The Prime Minister can't deflect; he must take responsibility. He was proud of the deal that he struck at the time. It's no good blaming the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, blaming the Department of Home Affairs or trying to shift responsibility. There were continuous representations to Australia from the then Prime Minister of New Zealand, and this Labor government gave in.</para>
<para>Under Labor's direction 99, serious criminals have been able to stay in our country. Under some pressure, it would seem Labor now have realised the error of their ways and will significantly refine, revoke, change or issue a new direction in place of direction 99. So why is a change needed if the Prime Minister is trying to say that there was nothing to see here? Well, I can tell you the whole thing is an absolute disaster. Last year the minister released 153 criminals into the community, including child sex offenders and murderers. This was after being caught flat-footed by the High Court decision, without legislation ready to fix the problem. We know that at least 30 of these criminals have since been charged with new offences. Labor's failures on community safety are simply unacceptable, and the minister must be held accountable.</para>
<para>The Department of Home Affairs warned the minister that his change could lead to more visa cancellations being overturned, but he ignored this warning. Media reported this week that a man had the cancellation of his visa reversed due to direction 99, despite having been convicted of eight counts of rape, 48 counts of sexual assault and three counts of indecent treatment of a child under the age of 16. When asked about whether Minister Giles was warned about the consequences of these changes, the Department of Home Affairs admitted he was warned that the direction 99 changes could lead to more visa cancellations for noncitizen criminals being overturned.</para>
<para>Yet the lies and the blame games continue. We heard from the Minister for Home Affairs that Minister Giles is a good minister. I'm quite honestly not sure how she draws that conclusion based on what we've seen, because Australians have been stolen from, assaulted and raped following the incompetence of Labor's key decision-makers. In another thought bubble, on Friday Minister Giles said criminals are being monitored by drones. The AFP don't appear to have any knowledge of it, nor do the state police forces. Either Minister Giles accidentally or casually disclosed a previously secret drone program or it's not operating at all. Whatever's going on, one thing we know for sure is that Labor can't be trusted on national security issues. It's a 'drone goal' for sure. The Prime Minister should sack the minister for immigration or the minister should just step aside in shame.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>India</title>
          <page.no>85</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr CHARLTON</name>
    <name.id>I8M</name.id>
    <electorate>Parramatta</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>As the chair of the Parliamentary Friends of India, I want to acknowledge the election today in India, where votes are still being counted. With 969 million registered voters, India has the largest electorate in the world. It's elections are a global showcase of democracy. This election being counted right now is tighter than many expected, which I think is a testament to the strength of Indian democracy. Australia's relationship with India has never been stronger. Last year, Prime Minister Modi visited Australia, becoming the first Indian Prime Minister to visit Australia twice during their premiership. Last year, Prime Minister Albanese visited India twice, becoming the first Australian Prime Minister to visit India twice in one year. No fewer than 13 Australian ministers have travelled to India in the last 12 months, already a record.</para>
<para>This unprecedented level of activity between Australia and India is not an accident. It reflects the fact that India's role in the world and its importance to Australia is changing, perhaps more than any other country. Consider just these three facts. This year, India became the largest nation in the world by population. The last time that title changed hands was at the fall of the Roman Empire. India's population is so young and its growth so rapid that, by 2050, it will be larger than China and the United States combined. India also has the world's fastest economic growth, faster than any major economy. It recently overtook the UK and Germany and it will soon overtake Japan to become the world's third-largest economy. India has the second-largest armed forces and the fastest growing military capability in the world. That's why, for all the twists and turns in India's history, that nation is about to come to an extraordinary point of promise, a point where it is undoubtedly a global superpower and, as a partner with Australia, a force for good in the world that contributes to the peace and prosperity of our region.</para>
<para>Over the last 10 years India has recorded some extraordinary achievements. In its economy it has transitioned from being one of the so-called fragile five to now being the world's fifth-largest economy and its fastest growing nation from an economic perspective. Its enormous reforms in payment systems and demonetisation have led to a surge in internet usage, with UPI transactions skyrocketing. India now has one of the most inclusive and sophisticated payment and financial systems in the world. By expanding electronic transaction accounts amongst the poor, millions of Indian families now have access to banking, and saving deposit accounts have increased by more than 200 per cent. These programs and rural development programs have seen poverty reduced by tens of millions. People are moving into the middle class and participating in India's thriving democracy and economy. India's tax reform agenda has catapulted it into a nation that now has a strong fiscal base. The introduction of a GST in 2017 and a reduction in cash transactions have laid the foundation for a modern economy and built India's fiscal firepower.</para>
<para>It's grown a local manufacturing base, making India a manufacturing hub, through initiatives like Vocal for Local and the Production Linked Incentive Scheme. India's total financial capitalisation of its primary bourse has grown massively, with a SENSEX rising from 24,000 to over 75,000 in the last 10 years. And its infrastructure development has been nothing less than extraordinary, with national highways seeing 60 per cent growth over the past decade; 31,000 kilometres of new rail networks added; new trade networks operational; and preparations for bullet trains underway.</para>
<para>India is an extraordinary partner for Australia. As I wrote in my book, India will shape Australia's future over the next century more than any other nation. And there is no more important relationship for Australia than India over that time horizon. We look forward to the conclusion of the Indian elections and to working with the new government to continue to build our relations.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Manufacturing Industry</title>
          <page.no>86</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LE</name>
    <name.id>295676</name.id>
    <electorate>Fowler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to express my disappointment in the federal budget: specifically, the lack of focus on developing small manufacturing businesses in Australia.</para>
<para>When many of us think about manufacturing, we imagine large, cavernous warehouses involving heavy industry. But manufacturing is not a particular sector; it is in fact a capability. My own electorate of Fowler is replete with manufacturers. More than 600 of them manufacture products, from food and building materials to medical supplies and products for the recycling industry. Manufacturing is the largest employer in my electorate, employing 40 per cent of the population compared to 5.9 per cent nationally. For smaller manufacturing companies to grow and develop into globally competitive markets, they need investment. They need government to remove obstacles like red tape, tax burdens and the crippling energy prices they have faced under this government. And there's the shortage of Australians with the necessary skills, as well as the inflation that has wiped out often years of hard work.</para>
<para>The insulting few dollars per year for spiking electricity bills for small businesses is not going to fix these problems. Nor is the $20,000 instant asset write-off going to lead to a sudden boom in manufacturing in Fowler, or anywhere else. We need better; we deserve better. The one-billion-dollar publicly funded initiative to establish an entire solar supply chain in Australia, spun as a step towards creating a manufacturing base for solar products, needs to be questioned. Is it a prudent move or a waste of public money, better spent elsewhere? Our current domestic solar efforts are just assembly lines for—guess what?—Chinese products. That is not manufacturing. To manufacture solar panels we would need to build the entire chain, or at least meaningful parts thereof, making polysilicon wafers and cells that would make up Australian-made panels. To do this we would need to invest not just one billion dollars but rather $10 billion to $20 billion. And that's before we find any customers or try to compete with China.</para>
<para>Industry spokespeople tell me that the government is pretty much on the back foot when it comes to nurturing our domestic industry, and that not a single dollar has been released from the National Reconstruction Fund. The NRF was part of the October 2022 federal budget, with an allocation of $15 billion to rebuild Australia's industrial base. How can we believe the government when not a single dollar has been released in almost two years since that was in the federal budget? The requirements of the NRF regarding the shares of equity within those businesses make it almost impossible for any small business to be able to secure this funding. One industry representative told me that businesses big enough to qualify for the fund would not even need to seek the funds in the first place.</para>
<para>The Industry Growth Program, the IGP, was established to support innovative small to medium enterprises. I'm told by industry representatives that the IGP has been inundated with applications but that, again, no money has gone out to small businesses in the two years since its fanfare announcement. In business, time is money, and inbuilt delays in acquiring funding render such assistance useless. The experiences of the IGP and the NRF do not fill me with confidence that the Future Made in Australia plan will do much, if anything, to develop the small businesses in Australia that are so vital if we are to compete globally in manufacturing or any other capability. It makes me wonder whether this has been designed only to benefit larger manufacturing businesses that are heavily staffed and influenced by the unions. Are Labor looking after their union bosses at the expense of the Aussie battler?</para>
<para>I am of the view that the government has not fully grasped the importance of boosting our local manufacturing businesses, businesses that give jobs to Australians and grow the economy. Manufacturing more products is our surest way out of the inflation caused by governments spending money like water and the resulting economic stagnation.</para>
<para>In principle, I share the aspiration of a future made in Australia, but I want more than statements of intent; I want delivery. I welcome the intention to offer 80,000 fee-free TAFE courses under the NRF to address skilled labour shortages, but I will be watching closely to make sure that this delivers the skills needed to change our assembly-line economy into a manufacturing one, rather than it being simply more money earmarked for new projects that goes into the bureaucracies of existing ones. If the government is genuinely committed to supporting growth in the manufacturing sector then I invite them to show us by developing advanced manufacturing in Western Sydney.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East</title>
          <page.no>87</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms THWAITES</name>
    <name.id>282212</name.id>
    <electorate>Jagajaga</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The situation in Gaza is catastrophic. It is horrific to see innocent children and people being killed when they should be protected. I once again reiterate the concerns and despair of so many people in my community who want to see an urgent end to innocent Palestinian civilians being killed. There must be a ceasefire now.</para>
<para>What is happening in Rafah—the killing of innocent civilians who have nowhere safe to go—must end. The Netanyahu government must listen to the Australian government and the many other members of the international community who have repeatedly said that this cannot continue. They must listen to the calls for a ceasefire that we have made repeatedly. I note it's now six months since we joined 152 other countries in the UN in voting for a ceasefire. International law must be respected. The ICC must be respected. Humanitarian aid must be allowed to flow at scale, as ordered by the International Court of Justice. Hamas must release hostages.</para>
<para>The US President has put forward a ceasefire proposal, and it should be taken up. Ultimately, we need a lasting peace. We need a two-state solution. As I have said before in this place and as I say once again, I add my voice to those of all who want to see our common humanity triumph, see lasting peace and see an immediate ceasefire.</para>
<para>As I make these comments tonight, I am also half-holding my breath, anticipating what might flow my way as a result of making them. While we should be able to talk about Gaza in this place and while we should be talking about it in our communities, the reality is that, at the moment, across our parliament and across our communities, we do not seem to be able to have important conversations in a respectful way, and I do worry about the implications of this for our democracy and for our communities.</para>
<para>Like a number of my Labor colleagues, I had to close my electorate office last Friday, based on security advice, and it's not the first time I have had to close my office in recent times. People absolutely have a right to protest in this country, but when protests are threatening and they intimidate our staff, that is concerning, and I worry about the implications for those people who most need support. Our electorate offices are often a place of last resort for vulnerable people in our community who are seeking help. People come to my office because they're struggling to access basic services or payments. Often, for these people, a local MP's office is the one place they know will be open to them, so I don't like having to close my doors to them or, indeed, to the many other people who want to have conversations with me. But I do at the moment have to worry for the safety and security of my staff. My staff, at the moment, are too often the brunt of heightened behaviour and language, and I know I am not unique in this amongst MPs at the moment.</para>
<para>I worry for the safety of my children when I receive various messages telling me that, as a mother, I have blood on my hands and that God will judge me. And, ultimately, I do worry about our democracy, because, if we can't make ourselves heard without threats and intimidation and if we can't have difficult conversations in a respectful way, then the potential for us to hear each other and to be able to make change together is greatly reduced.</para>
<para>This does spill across a range of issues at the moment. It does feel like there are too many times when members of the community approach members of parliament in a constantly heightened way. We can and should do better than to think that directing threatening and insulting messages at individual MPs is the way to create change. We can and should do better than to think that actions designed to intimidate and frighten is the way to create change.</para>
<para>I recently had a conversation with a member of my community who had migrated to our country. He's someone who sees me quite regularly while I'm out and about in the community with my children. He actually said to me how refreshing it was to be able to see that—to see an MP just in the community—because in his home country MPs are inaccessible. They're shut away from the community. I don't want our democracy to have to operate in that way. I don't want to have to do my role in a way where I have to be quarantined from community because of security concerns. I do continue to recognise it's a privilege to be elected to this place. I don't want women who are considering whether they want to be elected to this place to have to add security concerns onto an already long list of things that I know they are weighing up. It is on all of us to try and have better conversations, to lead better discussions, to respect each other and to work for change in a way that respects differences, respects our social cohesion and our democratic foundations.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Mobile Black Spot Program</title>
          <page.no>88</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr COLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>241067</name.id>
    <electorate>Banks</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Mobile Black Spot Program is incredibly important. It was created by the coalition government back in 2014. The guidelines were put out in 2013, and the program itself began in 2014. It's incredibly important because people in rural and regional Australia need mobile communications access. It's not a nice-to-have; it's a must-have. It's fundamental to the way we live, the way we work, the way we communicate and the way we communicate in times of crisis and times of emergency, so it's incredibly important. The coalition is passionate about the Mobile Black Spot Program. We will always fight for it. We will always defend it.</para>
<para>That's why it is so shocking that, in the budget recently released, we see that the government, on page 220 of Budget Paper No. 1, refers to the conclusion of the Mobile Black Spot Program. When you follow the numbers through in the budget, what you see is that, in 2027-28, there are zero dollars allocated to the Mobile Black Spot Program—not a single dollar. The government says that that's all okay, somehow, because there are other programs—in particular, a program called the better connectivity program—that will effectively do the same thing. But the problem is that, when you look at the budget papers, again, in three years time, how much money is allocated to the better connectivity program? Zero dollars. So there are zero dollars in the Mobile Black Spot Program, there are zero dollars in the better connectivity program, and there are zero dollars in the Peri-Urban Mobile Program—the three programs that are all broadly related—and the government says, 'That's okay.' It's not okay. It is the abolition of the Mobile Black Spot Program. There is not one dollar of funding for that program into the future from three years from now, and that is a disgrace. It is shameful. It must be funded.</para>
<para>The minister actually appeared on <inline font-style="italic">Sounds of the Mountains </inline>this morning, which no doubt is a widely-listened-to radio program. She was interviewed by David Eisenhauer on <inline font-style="italic">Sounds of the Mountains</inline>. In regard to the Mobile Black Spot Program, she said, 'The budget papers clearly show that the program is being funded through the better connectivity program.' The only problem with that statement is that people can read. If you read the budget papers, how much money is allocated to the better connectivity program in 2027-28? Zero. So how does the better connectivity program fund the Mobile Black Spot Program, which is also zero, if there are zero dollars allocated to the better connectivity program? Mr Eisenhauer, the interviewer, probably hadn't been through the budget papers in detail, but some people have. It is very concerning to have a minister who is obviously struggling across a number of fronts say something which is demonstrably false in that way. It is not appropriate, and it is very disappointing.</para>
<para>The funding for the Mobile Black Spot Program actually goes up in the election year—quite dramatically, in some cases, it goes up, oddly, in an election year; I'm sure it's a total coincidence—and then goes down to zero. It's shameful, but it's part of a pattern in relation to the Mobile Black Spot Program. Just last week, of course, the Auditor-General released a very important report into round 6 of the Mobile Black Spot Program. What does that report show? Let's recall that the now Prime Minister said that programs shouldn't be funded on the basis of them being in marginal seats. That's what the Prime Minister said before he was Prime Minister. His actions are different now that he is Prime Minister. What did the Auditor-General find? Eighty-one per cent of the seats personally hand-selected by the minister were in marginal seats for the Mobile Black Spot Program round 6. Even better, 74 per cent of the locations chosen by the minister, the Auditor-General tells us, were in Labor seats.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs Marino</name>
    <name.id>HWP</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>No!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr COLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>241067</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Isn't that remarkable—74 per cent in Labor seats. And it was done in such a haphazard fashion that in New South Wales, where 27 out of 27 allocations were in Labor seats, 10 of the allocations didn't go ahead—in some cases because nobody even applied for the funding.</para>
<para>This is trashing the Mobile Black Spot Program. It is treating the program with an appalling lack of respect. The coalition will never do that, and the government must restore funding to this crucial program.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Hosking, Mr Bill, Carter, Aunty Fay</title>
          <page.no>88</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CHESTERS</name>
    <name.id>249710</name.id>
    <electorate>Bendigo</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to acknowledge a very special veteran in my electorate, Bill Hosking. Bill is a Darwin Defender and a World War II veteran, and he turned 100 this year on 26 April. Bill's birthday is a special birthday not just because he turned 100 but for how it came to be on the 26th. He tells the story that he was born at midnight and his family had the choice of the 25th, Anzac Day, or the 26th, a date which was his father's birthday—and they went for his father's birthday.</para>
<para>This year, on the eve of his 100th birthday, Bill had pride of place leading the Kangaroo Flat RSL Anzac Day march in honour of his service. It was a special day for Bill, as he is one of our last remaining World War II veterans in Bendigo. He became involved in the Royal Australian Air Force Air Training Corps as a 17-year-old. His eyesight made him unsuitable for aircrew, so Bill spent his time in the service as part of the ground crew, salvaging and repairing aircraft. That is how he became stationed in the Northern Territory during World War II, and he was there during the attacks on Darwin.</para>
<para>Following his time in the RAAF, Bill gave his years of service to veterans. He helped establish the Central Victorian Veterans Support Centre and for many years volunteered there, helping local veterans to connect with support and assistance. He has his own views on veteran support services.</para>
<para>Bill is an active member of the Kangaroo Flat RSL and has been since his days in service. Importantly, he is a local treasure and well loved by all who know him. He always has a great story to share and a yarn, and a smile to greet anybody who comes through the door. Happy birthday, Bill, and I look forward to celebrating your 101st birthday.</para>
<para>I also rise to acknowledge the passing of Aunty Fay Carter, a Dja Dja Wurrung and Yorta Yorta woman. Aunty Fay was a leader in many fields for her people, including the landmark Native Title Act—the deal that formally recognised the Dja Dja Wurrung clan as the traditional owners in central Victoria. Aunty Fay was a remarkable woman that had a beautiful spirit that shone every time she smiled and spoke. Her story is like many of our First Nation leaders'.</para>
<para>Aunty Fay was born in 1935 on the verandah of the Echuca hospital because her mother, Iris, was not allowed inside. She shared this story often to ensure that the true history of our state and our health system was never forgotten and that the enduring impact on the present was also never forgotten.</para>
<para>A statement made by her people, Djaara, said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Aunty Fay always strived for the best outcomes for Aboriginal People, whether she was volunteering to progress self-determination … working for government, or for the community-run organisations she served.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">She was a guiding light for the many family members Aunty Fay had inspired to dedicate their lives to self-determination.</para></quote>
<para>Whilst Aunty Fay faced much discrimination throughout her life, she never let it beat her. She is known for saying the following:</para>
<quote><para class="block">When you look at the policies they've put in place over the years to try to make us go away, I think it must have really annoyed and amazed them that we're still here.</para></quote>
<para>That was her spirit. That is what I remember of Aunty Fay.</para>
<para>The statement by Djaara said Aunty Fay was happiest with her family. This is also what the statement says, which I find quite fitting and beautiful:</para>
<quote><para class="block">May she go in peace to the dreaming and be received by her Ancestors with the love she generously shared with her family and our community.</para></quote>
<para>My deepest condolences to her family and her community.</para>
<para>I say to Aunty Fay: thank you on behalf of all of us in Bendigo and central Victoria. Thank you for sharing your culture with our children and for the way you've enriched their lives for many generations. Thank you, Aunty Fay. Vale, Aunty Fay.</para>
<para>House adjourned at 20:00</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>NOTICES</title>
        <page.no>89</page.no>
        <type>NOTICES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Presentation</title>
          <page.no>89</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1></debate>
  </chamber.xscript>
  <fedchamb.xscript>
    <business.start>
      <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:WX="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
        <p class="HPS-MCJobDate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-MCJobDate">
            <a href="Federation Chamber" type="">Tuesday, 4 June 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 16:00.</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>Fowler Electorate: Multiculturalism</title>
          <page.no>93</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LE</name>
    <name.id>295676</name.id>
    <electorate>Fowler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Throughout the year many ethnic communities in Fowler hold a range of celebratory events and holidays that are unique to their culture. These groups include Vietnamese, Assyrians, Chaldeans, Mandeans, Laotians, Chinese Khmer, Cambodians, Serbians, Croatians and South Americans—just to name a few—all of whom have a significant presence in the Fowler community. Examples of annual celebrations include the Assyrian new year, the Cambodian new year, Tet and Ramadan, which are often held in the heart of our electorate, at the Fairfield Showground. I have been extremely lucky to be a part of many revitalising experiences, which have demonstrated strong affirmations of Fowler's diverse identity.</para>
<para>In these times of celebration, I'm reminded of the multicultural and multifaith nature of my community of Fowler. Fowler thrives on empowering the plurality of backgrounds and beliefs that form our community's distinctiveness. Fowler remains the multicultural heartland of Australia, with more than 70 per cent of my constituents having a first language that is not English and over 50 per cent having been born overseas. Not only this, Fowler also has a diversity of religious practices and traditions, including Catholicism, Buddhism and Islam, with over 90 institutions and places of worship.</para>
<para>Despite misrepresentations of our community in the media that signify division and fracture in recent times, I can assure you that our unity is steadfast. I refuse to allow superficial reporting to demonise my community based on the actions of a few. The recent unrest in the community has highlighted for me the resilience and capacity of the people of Fowler to come together to overcome loss and tragedy. I would like to emphasise that cohesion, harmony and tolerance are values which are deeply entrenched in the way my community interacts with each other and the world.</para>
<para>We draw strength from the differences present in the community. Our multifaith foundations are a blessing and an acknowledgement of the multitude of stories and walks of life in Fowler. These foundations are brought together with a commitment that people who have chosen to resettle in Australia uphold the Australian values that have made this city and country unique. I often remind people how lucky we are to be away from the wars and other divisions which we still witness today in parts of the world.</para>
<para>I'm proud to represent and speak on behalf of the whole Fowler community who share our common values of giving people a fair go, of mateship and of living in peace. It is my hope that the beauty and richness of the people of Fowler continue to shine through as an antidote to those who attempt to sow seeds of division among us.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Brand Electorate: Volunteers</title>
          <page.no>93</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MADELEINE KING</name>
    <name.id>102376</name.id>
    <electorate>Brand</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Volunteers are an integral part of all communities around Australia, and I would like to take this opportunity to thank the volunteers in my electorate for all the magnificent work that they do. Through its Volunteer Grants program the Albanese Labor government has delivered more than $66,000 worth of funding, shared among 31 magnificent community groups right across Brand.</para>
<para>Karnup Volunteer Fire and Emergency Services received $5,000 to help volunteers fight fires and provide emergency assistance to those in need—like in the recent storms that hit our community and damaged houses and property. Rockingham RSL and the Totally and Partially Disabled Veterans of WA in Baldivis will receive a total of $3½ thousand to help the many veterans who live in the community of Brand. Another community in Brand, South Coastal Health and Community Services, will receive $2,000 under the volunteer program. This money will assist them to continue delivering services to women and families within the Brand district such as counselling, therapeutic and support groups, and other health services. I'm really proud to be part of the Albanese Labor government which helps local volunteer groups do what they do best: connecting neighbourhoods and providing much-needed services to our local communities.</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government's budget delivers for the communities of Rockingham and Kwinana. Thanks to the federal Labor and WA Labor governments working together, every household in Brand will receive $700 off their power bill. That's a tremendous help in the cost-of-living crisis that we're seeing in Brand as well as across the country. It is real cost-of-living relief that will go a long way to taking pressure off people in my community. As well, more taxpayers will get a bigger and better tax cut under the Albanese Labor government. From 1 July this year, every Australian taxpayer will get a tax cut, with the average tax cut being around $1,600. In this budget we're also adding more medicines onto the PBS and freezing the maximum cost of PBS prescriptions. That means that no-one will pay more than $31.60 for a PBS script. That makes a real difference. Pensioners and concession card holders won't pay more than $7.70 for the medicines they need. That's really important in my community for people who are looking after their elderly parents or who need help with concession cards themselves. It makes a real difference to making ends meet in the community.</para>
<para>The federal Labor government is proud to support local families and hardworking people in the communities of Brand across all the suburbs of Rockingham and Kwinana and right across the nation.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Queensland: Water Infrastructure</title>
          <page.no>94</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOYCE</name>
    <name.id>299498</name.id>
    <electorate>Flynn</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Bundaberg region and the North Burnett region produce 25 per cent of Australia's fresh food. The Bundaberg growers produce tomatoes, macadamias, avocados, zucchini, squash, cucumbers, capsicum, chillis, sweet potatoes, strawberries, snow peas and beans, just to name a few. The region is also famous for its thriving sugar industry. The North Burnett region produces citrus, grapes, stone fruit and avocados. These amazing regions are producing delicious produce that the nation can enjoy. However, we all know that, with no water, there is no life. Rather than supporting the industries that feed this nation, we've seen the Labor government continually strip funding from vital water infrastructure projects.</para>
<para>More than $7 billion was taken out of water infrastructure in Labor's first budget in 2022. This included projects such as Urannah Dam, which was sensationally cancelled in the October 2022 budget, even though $483 million had been committed by the previous coalition government in May 2023 and even though the dam would have provided enough water to develop 20,000 hectares of irrigated, high-value agricultural land. To make matters worse, the Labor government has betrayed the Bundaberg and North Burnett regions in their most recent budget, by slashing the funding to restore the Paradise Dam. Prime Minister Albanese sat in the ABC Wide Bay studio and promised Labor would repair the dam, and now they have cut the funding that the previous coalition government secured.</para>
<para>Paradise Dam has become one of the biggest infrastructure failures in Australian history. It was built near Bundaberg in 2005 by the Labor government to serve the surrounding agricultural industry but was found to be at risk of collapse in 2019 due to engineering problems. We have now seen the federal Labor government turn their backs on the Bundaberg and North Burnett regions. The Queensland Labor government threw out 13 pieces of legislation to pull the dam down, so why can't this government just bypass all of this bureaucratic red tape, environmental impact studies, business cases, cultural heritage and so forth, and rebuild this piece of vital water infrastructure? Agriculture is poised to reach $100 billion by 2030 and, therefore, we need more water infrastructure to be built throughout Queensland. Water is an essential ingredient to the prosperity of life, and I'm pleased that water infrastructure such as Rookwood Weir has finally been completed.</para>
<para>Queensland cannot expand and give security to high-value agriculture, business, industry and modern urban living without the provision of more water. Our populations are continuing to grow, and with this there is the need to feed Australia. Queensland needs further water infrastructure to provide water security for our farmers and to take advantage of further expansion of agriculture in Central Queensland and the Wide Bay area.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Blair Electorate: Health Care</title>
          <page.no>94</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr NEUMANN</name>
    <name.id>HVO</name.id>
    <electorate>Blair</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Albanese Labor government's 2024 budget continues to deliver better health services, strengthening and expanding Medicare and rolling out cheaper medicines. Under the budget, nearly $70 million is invested for four new MRI machines in Blair, expanding affordable access to imaging services. Lumus Imaging Ipswich and Exact Radiology clinics in Ipswich will receive their MRI licences in 2025 and I-MED Radiology at St Andrew's Ipswich Private Hospital and Queensland X-Ray in Springfield will receive their licences in 2027. This means these radiology clinics will be able to provide Medicare billed MRI services, saving patients money and making MRIs more accessible to our community. We've nearly tripled the number of MRI Medicare funded services since we came to office. Nearly 74,000 residents received nearly 224,000 pathology services just last year in the Blair electorate. We're making sure that pathology tests stay bulk billed by indexing the Medicare rebates for common medical tests, thereby reducing waiting times and catching health problems sooner.</para>
<para>In addition to this, we've created and built the Ipswich Medicare Urgent Care Clinic at Riverlink in Ipswich, a huge success, with nearly 6,000 visits since it was opened in August last year, making it easier for local patients to access bulk-billing care close to home. This has reduced out-of-pocket expenses for people in the Ipswich region and also takes pressure off the Ipswich Hospital emergency department.</para>
<para>Just last week I opened the new Ipswich Medicare Mental Health Centre, formerly known as Head to Health, a commitment I got from the Hon. Emma McBride, the Assistant Minister for Mental Health and Suicide Prevention, when she was the shadow assistant minister before the last election. This is a commitment to free mental health information, services and support without the need for an appointment. All services will offer immediate support and follow-up care to people presenting in crisis, as well as short to medium care for people with moderate to severe mental health needs. The new Medicare Mental Health Centre is located at level 1 of the Eats Building in the Nicholas Street Precinct in the Ipswich CBD. The Ipswich service is the third Medicare mental health centre in Queens, with services already being operated in Kingaroy and Townsville. Any person can go to the centre themselves or call 1800595212 to speak to a trained professional or receive a referral to a suitable mental health service. This is critical to support my local region, and I want to thank the local PHN, of which Lucille Chalmers is the CEO and Dr Tony Bayliss is the chair, and everyone associated with creating this wonderful centre for the people of Ipswich.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Page Electorate: Casino Dance for Cancer, Page Electorate: Cricket</title>
          <page.no>95</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HOGAN</name>
    <name.id>218019</name.id>
    <electorate>Page</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I can't wait. The Casino Dance for Cancer is going to be held at the Casino RSM Club on 29 June. Hosted by the Cancer Council, it's an opportunity for all kinds of members of my community in Casino to put their talent to the test and be judged in a dance competition which will raise funds for the Cancer Council. The donations are used for world-class Cancer Council research, prevention programs, advocacy and support services.</para>
<para>This year the dancers are Erica Trustum, Marika Gava, Cindy Richards, Sarah Smith, Sonya Marks, Adam Armistead, Dan Clark, Cohen Parrish and Margaret Magner. They're given 12 weeks. They're teamed up with a professional dance teacher to learn a recital while also doing fundraising activities. The dancers have a goal of raising $3,000 in donations and have the chance to win three awards: the people's choice, the highest fundraiser and the judges' choice. The dance teachers this year are Sophie Gray, Arabella Barrett, Sarah Bird, Astoria Chapman, Angela Bontea, Keely Maguire, Jess Smith O'Rourke, Kate Dennis, Libby Wyatt and Jess Freeburn Mackney.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">A division having been called in the House of Representatives—</inline></para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 16:13 to 16:25</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HOGAN</name>
    <name.id>218019</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Kate Dennis, Libby Wyatt and Jess Freeburn Mackney. I'm on the judging panel along with Richie Williamson, the state MP for Clarence, Robert Mustow, the Richmond Valley mayor, and previous dance star Leesa Battistuzzi. I'm going to have my special gold judging panel jacket on, and I can't wait. I wish all the dancers the best of luck for the night.</para>
<para>I'd like to acknowledge Grace Parsons, Sammy-Jo Johnson, Georgia Redmayne and Carly Leeson, who are from my community. They have been selected to play in the 2024-25 Women's National Cricket League season. Georgia, from Alstonville, and Lismore's Grace Parsons have been selected for the Queensland Fire. Sammy-Jo, from Lismore, has been selected for the New South Wales Breakers. And Maclean's Carly Leeson has been selected for the ACT Meteors.</para>
<para>Georgia and Grace have played alongside each other for the past two seasons on the Queensland Fire team, as well as the national one-day final against Tasmania last summer. They're spending another season together. Carly's recent success had led her take on a recent leadership role with the Meteors. Previously, she's played as high up as Australia A. Sammy-Jo is incredibly excited to play in this season of the league. The Women's National Cricket League is a significant step towards professionalism for domestic cricket, with it being played just prior to the Women's Big Bash League.</para>
<para>Georgia, Grace, Sammy-Jo and Carly: you are consistently making our community incredibly proud with your incredible cricket talents and representation of our area. We wish you the best of luck for yourselves and your teams this season.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bennelong Electorate: School Leadership Awards</title>
          <page.no>95</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LAXALE</name>
    <name.id>299174</name.id>
    <electorate>Bennelong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The last few months I've had the privilege of travelling around local schools in Bennelong to present leadership awards to their school leaders. I do these visits because I want to use my role as a member of parliament to help encourage our school leaders and all students to take up leadership opportunities when they can. Leadership is not merely about hiding a position of title; it's about serving others and making a positive difference in their lives. We need more leaders, so today I want to give a shout out to all the young leaders in Bennelong who are giving this a go.</para>
<para>From Saint Charles in Ryde we have school captains Ruby Bedoya and Jacob Mickel, along with their colour house captains Georgia Papallo, Hugo Hadden, Sophia Cavallo, Ben Maroney, Sara Tosh, James Risben, Giselle Ponzi and Aston Bulmelhelm.</para>
<para>At Arden Anglican School, secondary captains and vice-captains include Lachlan Zia, Laura Pinyon, Zachary Seabrook and Isabel Aujierre. The junior captains and vice-captains are Nathan Kim, Marisa Tryall, Henry Swanson and Miu Yuijang.</para>
<para>Holy Spirit Catholic Primary School has captains Yashar Rampasad and Caitlin Earls, and vice-captains Janice Kim and Jayden Kim, along with their creative arts colour house and SRC representatives.</para>
<para>North Ryde Public School honours its school captains Harland Dankes and Claire Wang; vice-captains, Arnev, Aisla and Leyla Mahoney; and SRC members Mitchell McGregor, Noah Ustieya, Emma Lim and Monica Aurelo.</para>
<para>At Karonga School we recognise the leadership of William Leigh and Brendan Stone.</para>
<para>Epping West Public School celebrates its captains Charlie Shin and Brooklyn Chen and vice-captains Oshie Dutter and Justin Wu.</para>
<para>Marist college is led by college captain Benjamin Tao; vice-captains, Jase Satuwahla and Charles Ward; with an extensive team of supporting leaders, including Joshua Burns, Mina Moses, Luca Boyd, Jerome d'Beduani, Ellie Burrowes, Archibald Kingham, Xavier Musli, Benjamin Xu and Darius Mushtagi.</para>
<para>Ryde Secondary College acknowledges captains Alexandra Dennet and Nate Killoughby, vice-captains Haley Phipps and Luke Oshea and their team of prefects.</para>
<para>Lastly, Eastwood Heights Public School celebrates its school leaders Chloe H, Terrence X, Nolan D and Charlotte F, along with school ministers Olivia H, Ellie H, Aiden B, Roa S, Oliver L, Irene A, Luca R, Jessica R, Evie S, Layla W, Liv F, Amelia L, Stacey D, Rydia S, Sophie L and Tyler F—I got through them all. I want to congratulate all these amazing school leaders. Leadership can sometimes take its toll, so I want to give you a big shout-out here in parliament. Thanks for what you're doing.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Petition: Renewable Energy</title>
          <page.no>96</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
    <electorate>Wannon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to table a petition. It's a 4½-thousand-signature petition on the offshore wind farm which has been proposed off the coast of Warrnambool and Port Fairy. I thank Richard Conlan for putting this petition together. What this petition says is that the local community strongly opposes the development of this offshore wind farm and has grave concerns for the pristine coastal and marine environment, local endangered species, the Logans Beach Whale Nursery and associated migratory whale pathway, and unique marine bird life, including migratory birds like the short-tailed shearwater. I will seek leave at the end of the speech to table that petition.</para>
<para>What I also would like to table is a freedom-of-information request, which has come through from the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water migratory species section. I want to table this as well because it goes to the heart of this petition. It says a lot about the environmental impact that this offshore wind farm will have. But I want to point to two factors in this FOI document. It says: 'The potential for impacts from human-activity underwater noise is of particular concern in areas within or close to habitat-critical-to-survival areas for southern right whales—that is, the reproduction biologically important areas, where whales are resident for long periods—that is, weeks to months—of time and pregnant and nursing females and calves are present.' It says that in this FOI, and I am going to seek to table it.</para>
<para>It also talks about the impact on seabird breeding areas in relation to the proposed declaration areas. Offshore islands near Portland, Lawrence Rocks, Lady Julia Percy Island and Griffiths Island in Port Fairy are important seabird breeding islands. Individuals from other island groups will enter the proposed declaration areas on migration and/or foraging trips. For example, short-tailed shearwaters generally return to their burrows every night, but some feed 150 to 200 kilometres away.</para>
<para>This offshore wind farm must be opposed. The local community have voted with their feet. There are 4½ thousand signatures against it, and I seek leave to table this petition and the FOI request.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It's my understanding that you don't need leave for the petition. What else are you seeking leave to table?</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The FOI request, which has come from the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water migratory species section. I would also—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I don't need any more commentary. Is leave granted?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Doyle</name>
    <name.id>299962</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>When you first came to me, member for Wannon, you said it was about giving leave for a petition. You didn't say anything about anything else.</para>
<para>Leave not granted.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>You don't have the call. I'm giving the call to the Minister for Home Affairs.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Hotham Electorate: Community Services</title>
          <page.no>97</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms O'NEIL</name>
    <name.id>140590</name.id>
    <electorate>Hotham</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It was recently National Volunteer Week. Of course, we've got lots of members of parliament around me here, and we all know that volunteers are the heart and soul of our communities and the amazing organisations that make those communities tick. We also heard some really exciting news in my local area of Hotham recently that 23 organisations were recognised under the 2023-24 volunteer grants, and they received a total of $63,225. That means so much to organisations in my local area of Hotham. Now, I'd love to talk to the parliament about all of those 23 organisations and all the amazing volunteers that support them, but I've only got three minutes so I'm going to give a quick snapshot of some of the organisations that I'm really proud of in my local electorate.</para>
<para>Dixon House Neighbourhood Centre has been operating in Clayton for more than 30 years. This is a really important and central part of Melbourne. It offers educational, social and welfare based programs, and volunteers serve as mentors for other people in the community. Manager Winston said it best, when he heard about his volunteer grant: 'Volunteer grants acknowledge the immense contribution of volunteers to our society.'</para>
<para>I also want to talk about the Soup Angel in Bentleigh East, a newer organisation that started up in 2020. Founder and teacher Nicole began cooking healthy soups for the elderly and other vulnerable people who couldn't go to the supermarket during lockdown. Isn't this just incredible? Now there are 50-plus soup angels volunteering today. They deliver more than 130 bowls of soup every two weeks to people who are doing it tough in our community: people who are in our homeless shelters; people who are suffering from mental health conditions. The funds that we've been able to secure for them are going towards petrol, storage costs and other things that make this organisation able to function.</para>
<para>I want to recognise a couple of amazing local sporting clubs. They do so much for our local area. Certainly I'm down there on the sidelines on most Saturday and Sunday mornings, cheering on various teams in my electorate. I want to mention the Clarinda Tennis Club. They're going to use their volunteer grant for uniforms and an EFTPOS machine. Treasurer Gayle said, 'Grants are a big part of keeping our volunteers, members and the general community enjoying tennis.' Steve from Oakleigh District Football Netball Club added, 'Community organisations constantly suffer volunteer burnout, and this grant provides some real positivity.'</para>
<para>There are some specific organisations, too, helping our littlest citizens in Hotham. There's the toy library in Springvale. It's such an amazing service for children. Team leader Tofu said: 'This program brings smiles and strengthens community bonds. The grant means volunteers can provide toys and promote sustainability by investing in shelving, storage and cleaning materials.'</para>
<para>There were plenty more, and that's just a small sample of the incredible work that volunteers are doing in my local community. This is one of the reasons I'm so proud to represent south-east Melbourne in this great parliament of ours, and I want to thank all of our volunteers in Hotham for the work they do.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybercrime: Scams</title>
          <page.no>97</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HOWARTH</name>
    <name.id>247742</name.id>
    <electorate>Petrie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak today on scams and how they are affecting our nation each and every day. From phone calls to emails to texts and on social media, scams attack us in various ways. I want to raise awareness around them. I know we've all had those phone calls asking about our electricity bills or health insurance from people in crowded offices. Almost everyone has had a scam experience before. Most scams financially harm the victim. We need to educate people not to give credit card numbers, personal information, location, or even text codes, away online, to make sure that they protect themselves.</para>
<para>People in my own electorate have lost hundreds of thousands of dollars from scams. Nationally, in 2024, over $92 million was lost from almost 100,000 reported scams. That's an astounding number when you think about it. Hardworking people are losing money that they have paid tax on; it's taken them a long time to earn that money, and it can be gone like that.</para>
<para>Scammers are taking advantage of new technology, products and services, and major events. They use them to create believable stories that can give them your money and personal details. There are numerous types of scams. To list just a few, there are: investment scams, false billing scams, jobs and employment scams, threats to life, threats of arrest, identity theft, online shopping scams and dating and romance scams. So deciphering scams can be quite difficult.</para>
<para>I recently met with the Australian Financial Complaints Authority to discuss a range of topics solely related to scams. They told me that they've dealt with 100,000 complaints in the last 12 months and that 1,251 of those complaints were from the Petrie electorate, which is higher than normal. Four per cent of those were from small businesses and 96 per cent were from individuals. Four hundred and fifty complaints were about banks; 260 complaints were about general insurers; 172 were about credit providers. There were about 130 complaints in relation to scams themselves.</para>
<para>Now, not every complaint that the Australian Financial Complaints Authority receives is upheld. In some of the complaints that people have put in, it was just bad luck; they weren't entitled to receive the money. But I would encourage people within my own electorate: if you think you're being scammed or if you've got a complaint about finances—</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">A division having been called in the House of Representatives—</inline></para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 16:39 to 16:47</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HOWARTH</name>
    <name.id>247742</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>More people, more Australians, with scam experiences haven't reported them. The government could be doing a lot more here in relation to scams. They could be advertising to Australians about some of the dangers around scams instead of spending hundreds of millions of dollars on things like tax cuts that the coalition legislated. Always stop, think and check before you act.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bells Amusements, Deadly Runners, Kemp, Mr Leonard</title>
          <page.no>98</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms McBAIN</name>
    <name.id>281988</name.id>
    <electorate>Eden-Monaro</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Congratulations to Bells Amusements on celebrating 100 years of service and fun. Although Bells are an Eden-Monaro family based in Queanbeyan, they travel and provide sideshow entertainment across Australia. If you're keen to know more about this family then check out the documentary <inline font-style="italic">The Carnival</inline> on SBS OnDemand. It gives a fantastic insight into the life of the Bell family.</para>
<para>Elwin Thomas Bell was born in 1942. When he left boarding school he began working and fighting in his father's boxing tent. He went on to run his own business of amusement rides and games and, amazingly, is still working and travelling Australia at 81 along with many in his family. Over the past 100 years Bells have experienced many challenges and many successes. Most recently the Black Summer bushfires and the COVID-19 provided unique challenges for Bells Amusements and the travelling sideshow industry with the cancellation of ag shows across the country. Despite this, Elwin and his family have ridden the roller-coaster and have returned to provide exciting sideshow entertainment to ag shows around Australia. Happy 100 years to Bell's Amusements.</para>
<para>The Deadly Runners program is deadly. It is a hugely successful program created by Kuku Yalanji woman Georgia Weir, an Eden-Monaro resident living in Dalmeny. The vision of the program is to bring the joy of running to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. The Deadly Runners group creates a safe space for Aboriginal people to come together to share their stories, their culture and to support each other.</para>
<para>Recently the Deadly Runners were invited into the Wallaga Lake community and it was great to see 17 new members achieve their five-kilometre goal. This successful program shows what can be achieved when members of the community are supported to do the work that works in their community. Thank you, Georgia, for your efforts and passion to deliver this program, and I look forward to seeing runners wearing the distinctive black-and-white singlets throughout Eden-Monaro.</para>
<para>Finally, I want to give a shout-out to an amazing volunteer in Queanbeyan, Leonard Kemp, for his outstanding contribution to assisting students with maths. Over the last five years, Len has provided one-on-one support for Queanbeyan High School students who need an extra hand in maths. However, that's not all. He has been a volunteer helping students to love and to understand maths for 25 years. He has spread the love of maths to a number of schools across the ACT and New South Wales, including Woden special school, Charles Condor school, Jindabyne Central School, Cooma Christian school, the Anglican School Googong, Karabar High and, most recently, Queanbeyan High. The tributes from the parents have been nothing short of amazing. They have said the support that Len has provided their kids has been second to none. Thanks, Len, for helping to make maths more accessible and easier to understand for so many people across our regions.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</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>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>98</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2024-2025</title>
          <page.no>98</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="r7186" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2024-2025</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Consideration in Detail</title>
            <page.no>98</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Before the minister gets the call, I would like to make a statement to the Federation Chamber, noting that, before the Federation Chamber considers the first portfolio, I'd like to remind all members of the purpose of the consideration in detail stage and outline the way it is expected to proceed.</para>
<para>On Tuesday 28 May, the House agreed to a resolution setting the order and timing for the consideration of portfolios. Any variation to this order and timing can only be made on a motion moved by a minister. Consideration in detail is a debate, and the call will be alternated between government and non-government members as always. Even though this debate sometimes takes the format of questions and answers, this is not question time.</para>
<para>Ministers and government backbench members will both be considered as speakers for the government's turn and should bear this in mind when they seek the call. Members are required to be relevant to the portfolio being examined, but there is no requirement for direct relevance to any questions asked. Given the time limits applying to each portfolio, it might be practical for ministers to respond to more than one question when they seek the call. Each minister and member will have up to five minutes to speak each time they are called, but they may wish to speak for a shorter time. Ministers may wish to speak first and make an introductory statement when debate on their portfolio begins, but that is a matter for them to decide.</para>
<para>Members will be aware of the terms of the resolution providing dates and times after which the questions to agree to expenditure on each portfolio will be put. To avoid confusion, when these times are reached, a member who is speaking will be allowed to continue their remarks, but chairs—whoever is sitting in this chair—are obligated to put the question immediately at the conclusion of that member's speech, and no further debate will be permitted.</para>
<para>Employment and Workplace Relations Portfolio</para>
<para>Proposed expenditure: $5,176,374,000</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:53</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr O'CONNOR</name>
    <name.id>00AN3</name.id>
    <electorate>Gorton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to make some comments in relation to the decision by the government to continue to invest in skills and training and invest in our future. The budget handed down three weeks ago by the Treasurer is one for every Australian. We're delivering a tax cut to every taxpayer and a $300 energy rebate to every household. Helping Australians with the cost of living is our government's No. 1 priority, so we're making medicines cheaper, increasing Commonwealth rental assistance and waiving $3 billion of student debt. At the same time, the budget will ensure that we continue to strengthen the VET sector, close national skills gaps and train the skilled workforce we need right across the economy, including to achieve our ambitious goals of building 1.2 million more homes, net zero and a Future Made in Australia. While the opposition budget reply did not contain a single skills policy, our budget included measures to bolster skills growth and development in the clean energy sector, the construction and housing sector, and the manufacturing sector, as well as to support apprentices and break down barriers for women in male-dominated industries.</para>
<para>These investments continue our work to remove cost barriers to education and training and incentivise people to train in areas where our economy needs them most. That's why we've made announcements to continue investing in fee-free TAFE, with 20,000 additional places to teach skills in the housing and construction workforce. By removing financial barriers to study, fee-free TAFE is giving Australians a great opportunity to get secure and stable employment. Our commitment to deliver 20,000 additional fee-free places in construction and housing comes on the back of 355,000 Australians having already enrolled in fee-free TAFE last year, and we are delivering a further 300,000 fee-free TAFE places from this year.</para>
<para>I visited many TAFEs in Sydney and Melbourne recently with federal colleagues, including Randwick TAFE, Ultimo TAFE, Chisolm and Dandenong TAFEs, and Swinburne. During these visits we spoke with students who right now are training in areas of high skill needs, thanks to fee-free TAFE—students like Chelsea, from Victoria, who is completing her pre-apprenticeship in plumbing. Chelsea chose the course because she likes the hands-on work and likes that it gets the mind thinking as well. She said a fee-free TAFE course makes it easier for her. Students like Chelsea are on track to get secure and well-paid jobs and help build more homes for Australians. As we help train the future workforce we're investing $265 million to provide additional targeted support to priority apprentices.</para>
<para>Importantly, we're reversing some of the baked-in cuts left by the previous coalition government. Apprentices who are training in priority areas will receive an additional $2,000 while their employers will receive an additional $1,000 in the first year to subsidise costs—$5,000 each in total, which is an improvement upon the previous government's last budget, where we saw the cutting of support for both employers and apprentices. When we came to government we were left without a national skills agreement. In fact, for the entire time of the previous government, almost a decade, they did not strike a national skills agreement.</para>
<para>The skills shortage and tight labour market has indeed compelled industry to challenge the outdated notion that only half the population is suitable for jobs. I speak of those occupations that have been, in this case, predominantly male and have really locked out opportunities for women in very high-paid skilled work. For that reason, we want to do more. The budget provides $55 million to increase the proportion of women in male dominated trades. It's not only socially good; it's an economic imperative that we provide the supply of needed skills to the construction sector. This is another way that we can provide opportunities for women while also supplying skills to this important sector.</para>
<para>There are also great opportunities in our rapidly evolving renewables sector. A study by Jobs and Skills Australia shows that the sector will need an additional 240,000 workers. We're investing over $90 million to help skill the clean energy workforce, including $50 million for training facility upgrades and $30 million to accelerate the clean energy teacher and trainer workforce. We've also expanded the New Energy Apprenticeships Program so more apprentices can benefit from the $10,000 cost-of-living cash boost to complete their training in a clean energy related occupation.</para>
<para>These are investments that will help workers who need skills and help businesses that are crying out for skills that they have up to this point not been able to find and that our economy needs to ensure that we have a future made in Australia.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LEY</name>
    <name.id>00AMN</name.id>
    <electorate>Farrer</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today I want to take stock of Australia's skills sector after two years of the Albanese government and ask a very—</para>
<para class="italic"><inline font-style="italic">A division having been called in the House of Representatives—</inline></para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 16:59 to 17:05</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LEY</name>
    <name.id>00AMN</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to take stock of Australia's skills sector after two years of the Albanese government and ask a very simple question: are the skills of Aussies better today than when Labor took over? On almost every single metric and with every update, we can only conclude that the skills of Aussies are not better today but are actually getting worse under Anthony Albanese. Each day under Labor means the gap between promise and delivery widens further. Fewer Australians are taking up new skills, not more.</para>
<para>Labor's approach to skills at the last election was to make commitments to win votes, as if that were an end in itself. Labor sold us its dream that fee-free TAFE would be the silver bullet for Australia's skills and training needs. They told us fee-free TAFE was going to solve it all, promising almost 500,000 courses. What they didn't tell us was that on skills they would back bureaucrats instead of industry and that fee-free TAFE would amount to little more than a funding top-up scheme for state governments. We've seem them rebrand the National Skills Commission to Jobs and Skills Australia, we've seen them rebrand industry clusters to the Jobs and Skills Councils, and we've seen them sign up to a National Skills Agreement that provides the same amount of funding that was on the table under the coalition with less going to students and more going to state governments. And let's not forget the Jobs and Skills Summit—remember that? It was the summit that was going to solve all of our workforce shortages. Here we are, just over two years since Anthony Albanese got the keys to the Lodge and 18 months on from the Jobs and Skills Summit, after yet another budget which will fail to skill Australians.</para>
<para>So it is time to take stock. At the most basic level, the test Anthony Albanese set for himself was that Labor would fix skills shortages and skill more Australians. The data is in, and the trendlines show that Labor's going in the wrong direction. According to Jobs and Skills Australia, 36 per cent of occupations were assessed as 'in shortage' in 2023. That's up from 31 per cent in 2022. Sixty-six occupations were added to the 'in shortage' list in 2023, meaning that, on Labor's watch, over 330 occupations are in shortage across Australia. Shortly after the election, Labor described worsening skills shortages as something that 'reinforces the urgent need to tackle skills shortages', and they said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">After a decade of inaction, we have taken immediate steps … to plan for the future, address skills gaps and strengthen our VET sector.</para></quote>
<para>Clearly, Labor's policies are not working. Skills shortages have got worse, not better.</para>
<para>The failures do not end with worsening skills shortages either. We know there are fewer Australians in training, not more. When the coalition left office, there were nearly 430,000 apprentices and trainees in training, and 280,000 Aussies commenced their courses over that year. In September 2023, the latest numbers we have, the number of apprentices and trainees in training has fallen to 370,000 and commencements have fallen to 170,000. This means that, after 18 months of Labor policies, the number of apprentices and trainees in training has dropped by 60,000. That's close to 15 per cent. New training starts have dropped by over 100,000, or 38 per cent. So skills shortages are worse, we have fewer Australian apprentices and trainees on the tools, and we have over 100,000 fewer Australians taking up a trade or a skill.</para>
<para>But it gets even worse. Even the much vaunted fee-free TAFE has not materially increased the number of students studying courses at TAFEs. We know that the number of government funded students at TAFE was over 400,000 between January and March 2023 under fee-free TAFE. This was the first quarter since the commencement of fee-free TAFE, a period in which the government saw fee-free TAFE enrolments hit over 100 per cent of the allocation. But the number of government funded students at TAFE institutes was lower in 2023, during fee-free TAFE, than over the same period in 2021, when the coalition's Job Trainer was in effect. So we have worsening skills shortages, fewer apprentices, fewer trainees, fewer new training starts and a lower number of students taking up government funded courses at TAFE. No matter which way you look at it, Labor's skills agenda is falling flat.</para>
<para>With the cost-of-living crisis getting worse not better, with prices staying higher for longer, and with a tripling of manufacturing and construction insolvencies, things will only get worse for young apprentices. Instead of stepping up, Labor is stepping back, with a refusal to extend the coalition's wage supports while they wait for yet another review to conclude.</para>
<para>While Anthony Albanese and Labor sit on their hands, the skills of Australians just continue to get worse. All we want to see is the skilling of young Australians back on track.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr GARLAND</name>
    <name.id>295588</name.id>
    <electorate>Chisholm</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Unlike those opposite, I'm optimistic about the future of this country and I back the ambition of Australians who want to go to TAFE and to university and secure a well-paying job. I'm really delighted to be able to speak about our track record here and what our vision is for skills and jobs in the future.</para>
<para>We know that already we've delivered 355,000 fee-free TAFE places, and there are an additional 320,000 places to come. This week we saw the Fair Work Commission announce that the lowest paid workers in the country would receive a 3.75 per cent wage increase. This is an incredibly important development for those workers. It's more money in their pockets. In listening to the Fair Work Commission discuss their decision, there will be special attention being paid to feminised work and workforces by the commission in the future, and I welcome that.</para>
<para>Our government said we were going to deliver for workers, and we're doing that. We have backed and funded a 15 per cent pay rise for aged-care workers. We've introduced paid family and domestic violence leave, and it's really important to note here that this is for every worker, including casual workers. I remember the day that this was introduced into the parliament and the day it was passed in the parliament. They were emotional days. While we sat in the chamber, we had advocates sitting in the galleries who could attest to how life-saving this measure would be.</para>
<para>We've introduced the secure jobs, better pay bill; we've ended zombie agreements; and we are unapologetic about our support for ensuring that Australia's lowest paid workers get a pay rise. In fact, I stood with the Prime Minister—before he was the Prime Minister, prior to the last election—when he was asked if he supported a $1 pay rise for Australia's lowest paid workers. We all know the answer to that question. It was 'Absolutely'. Unfortunately those opposite and commentators found that response contemptible. He was mocked. It was outrageous. On this of the House we don't apologise for supporting Australia's lowest paid workers having a pay increase in line with their cost-of-living expenses. Presumably, seeing the 3.75 per cent pay increase would have made those opposite apoplectic if they could not handle a $1 an hour pay increase back then. We would not apologise for this. I really do urge those opposite to join with us and back the lowest paid workers in the country, who work so hard to provide care and services that we and our families and the communities that we represent rely on.</para>
<para>Under our government, since the election, nominal wages have been growing at an annualised average of 3.9 per cent compared to 2.2 per cent under our predecessors, and, of course, we've delivered IR reforms through the closing loopholes legislation. This is really important. We have criminalised wage theft. We've stopped the underpayment of workers with labour hire through same job, same pay, which is part of the closing loopholes legislation. We've introduced a new criminal offence of industrial manslaughter. I would have thought everybody in this place could agree that workers should be able to go to work and come home safely.</para>
<para>We have also introduced world-leading minimum standards for gig economy workers. We've ended the forced permanent casual loophole and we're offering a proper pathway to casual conversion. In my first speech I spoke about the importance of ensuring that people in our community have secure work so that they could plan their lives. I'm really glad that we have taken the step to assist people navigate a pathway to secure work that allows them and their families to plan and build their lives in all of our electorates—to spend time at the local footy club, to commit to volunteer work on weekends—because there is certainty of hours and wages. I'm proud that the measures we've introduced as a government will set up the VET and university sectors to address future skills shortages and cost-of-living pressures for students, including by investing in the Commonwealth prac payments, where we will provide $369.2 million for teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work students to do placements in higher education and ensuring, too, that we are doing what we can to reduce the burden of student debt.</para>
<para>I know this is really important to my electorate of Chisholm. I've had hundreds of people speak to me about this issue. We are getting on with building a better future and not leaving everyone behind. I'm really proud about the measures that we've introduced in this portfolio area.</para>
<para><inline font-style="italic">A division having been called in the House of Representatives</inline>—</para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 17:15 to 17:24</para>
<para>Proposed expenditure agreed to.</para>
<para>Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts Portfolio</para>
<para>Proposed expenditure, $5,783,392,000</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms McBAIN</name>
    <name.id>281988</name.id>
    <electorate>Eden-Monaro</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's been just under a month since the Treasurer handed down the Albanese Labor government's third budget. It is a budget which builds upon the solid foundations that we have laid in our first two years of government and cements our commitment to a future made in Australia. It is responsible, suitably balanced and allows for the delivery of nationally significant nation-shaping projects. From infrastructure, strategic transport, connectivity, net zero and local road upgrades, our investments will forge a better future. They will drive productivity, boost economic growth, create jobs and ensure we continue to manage inflationary pressures.</para>
<para>Our sensible reforms to the $120 billion Infrastructure Investment Program have made it more sustainable while allowing us to invest $16.5 billion into new and existing projects. There is $4.6 billion for new projects, including upgrades to Western Sydney infrastructure, improving the capacity of METRONET in Western Australia and delivering bridge and intersection upgrades along the Warrego Highway in Queensland. Our $10 billion investment in existing projects ensures they won't just be in media releases; they'll actually be delivered. Projects like the Mount Ousley interchange, which I had the pleasure of visiting a couple of weeks ago, will receive an additional $72 million. Our responsible investment ensures that we target projects that communities want us to deliver and that we complete projects that already have shovels in the ground.</para>
<para>Everywhere I go, businesses, councils and organisations tell me that it's hard to keep workers in their communities because there has been nowhere to house them. It's a direct consequence of nearly 10 years of sitting on your hands, which is what the opposition were doing in government, but now we are doing something about it. We're making significant investments to build more homes across this country. We're building our $500 million commitment to the Housing Support Program with an additional $1 billion to support states and territories to deliver enabling infrastructure that will help us to get more homes built sooner.</para>
<para>We're focused on a future that delivers fibre upgrades so more Australian families and small businesses are connected to high-speed broadband, because connectivity is no longer a nice to have; it's an absolute necessity. The $1.3 billion delivered in the 2024-25 budget forms part of our $2.4 billion equity investment to support the NBN's ongoing fibre upgrade program. We're making it easier to operate a business and to study and work from home, with 10,000 households and businesses across my electorate of Eden-Monaro alone now able to order a faster NBN service.</para>
<para>Unlike those opposite, we're building for the future, which also includes our transition to net zero. The transport sector will play a key role in this, which is why this budget includes funding for the implementation of the new vehicle efficiency standard, sustainable aviation fuels and renewable diesel. The biggest commitments to the Australian flagged and crewed maritime strategic fleet ever, something totally neglected by those opposite over the last decade, will build our capacity and allow more movement of cargo in times of crisis by minimising the impacts of international supply chain disruptions.</para>
<para>We're committed to keeping Australians safe and secure. A key focus of the budget has been on tackling the scourge of scams, improving safeguards for children online and narrowing the digital gap for First Nations communities. It's not just online safety that we are focused on. We're also committed to making safer local roads that we use each and every day. It's why we're strengthening our partnership with local councils and delivering more funding to get targeted road improvements off the ground. We're progressively increasing Roads to Recovery from $500 million a year to a billion dollars per year. We're increasing the road Black Spot Program from $110 million a year to $150 million per year, and we're introducing a new $200 million Safer Local Roads and Infrastructure Program.</para>
<para>The budget also allocates $100 million towards a new National Active Transport Fund. This will support states and territories to improve bicycle and walking paths across the country. We also know how important airports are for connectivity right through our regional and remote communities. That's why this budget includes additional funding for the Remote Airstrip Upgrade Program, the Regional Airports Program and the Remote Aerodrome Inspection Program.</para>
<para>From local footpaths to local roads to major infrastructure projects, our investments through the 2024-25 budget build on everything that we've achieved for this country in our first two years and will ensure we continue to build a better future for generations to come.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHESTER</name>
    <name.id>IPZ</name.id>
    <electorate>Gippsland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's often said in the finance sector that past performance is no guarantee of future results, but, in the case of the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government, I'm afraid it's probably a pretty good indicator. I'm not optimistic that we're going to get any answers here today.</para>
<para>Why do I say this? Because this minister and her department avoid scrutiny at all opportunities and refuse to answer basic questions, and the cabinet minister hasn't even bothered to turn up to consideration in detail. They are incompetent. I have repeatedly written to this minister on behalf of my constituents and respectfully sought information on road projects in my electorate, and my community has been treated with complete contempt—the same contempt that allows a cabinet minister to not even bother to turn up tonight. So I ask the minister: given that her ministerial colleagues are able to reply to correspondence from MPs within a few weeks, why does it take this minister and her department up to 10 months to reply to letters?</para>
<para>I refer specifically to the Princes Highway corridor program in Victoria and the confirmation in Senate estimates that there is $156 million of unallocated funding in that program. Not a single new project has actually started in this program on this minister's watch. The scale of bureaucratic bungling is unfathomable to motorists driving on this road. There's no sense of urgency and there's a complete disregard for the safety of the travelling public on the Princes Highway. My question is: given the deteriorating state of the highway and the increases in road trauma during this term of government, what steps is the cabinet minister taking to ensure this funding is spent in a timely manner to address road safety and productivity concerns in Victoria?</para>
<para>I also want to refer to the minister's comments in relation to the Stronger Communities Program:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Every single community in Australia is unique, and the Albanese Government recognises that local governments, community organisations and that people who live in their region best understand their local priorities.</para></quote>
<para>The minister's department website says that all rounds of the Stronger Communities Program have been 'very successful'. Minister, if this program is so important, why did the government cut the funding in the budget and place additional pressure on families to fundraise for their local community and sporting organisations, adding to the cost-of-living pressures on these small communities?</para>
<para>In that same vein, I would like to refer to the absent cabinet minister's repeated claims that Australian motorists will experience reduced running costs as a result of the government's vehicle efficiency standards. I ask the cabinet minister, again in her absence, because she couldn't be bothered turning up to consideration in detail: in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis, do you acknowledge that the purchase price of some of Australia's most popular vehicles will increase under your legislation? Minister, why won't you release modelling on the impact the vehicle efficiency standards will have on the purchase price of vehicles? If it's true that the drive-away prices will increase under your vehicle efficiency standards, has the government done any other modelling on whether Australians are likely to keep their current cars for longer and thus delay any of the claimed environmental benefits under this program?</para>
<para>Finally, I want to refer to the Albanese government's broken promise to provide fair increases to local government funding, and I refer to this statement from the Australian Local Government Association after the release of the budget. The ALGA said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">This year's Budget will be incredibly disappointing to many councils and communities that have been waiting for the Government to deliver on its fair funding promise …</para></quote>
<para>I do note that the Minister for Regional Development, Local Government and Territories is at the table, and, on behalf of ALGA and other local government associations, I encourage her to respond to this question. Your government, the Albanese government, promised to make fair funding increases prior to the last election and hasn't done it. Minister, isn't the inquiry into the financial sustainability of local government just another cynical attempt to kick the can down the potholed road until after the next election?</para>
<para>If we compare funding commitments over a five-year period, the coalition invested $3 billion in additional road funding specifically for local government. The local roads and community infrastructure program was extremely successful and well received by the local government sector—another program cut by this government.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHESTER</name>
    <name.id>IPZ</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for McEwen has woken up! The member for Eden-Monaro has woken up as well! It was another program cut by the Albanese government. So, in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis, the burden will fall on family budgets as ratepayers will be forced to add to the widening gaps. Why do Australians always pay more under a Labor government?</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LAXALE</name>
    <name.id>299174</name.id>
    <electorate>Bennelong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Labor budget is delivering significant investments in the infrastructure that links our communities, powers our economy and builds the foundations for a future made in Australia. By funding key infrastructure projects, this budget lays the foundation for better cities and better regions to live in. In my electorate of Bennelong our community is directly benefiting from this well-thought-out and well-funded infrastructure budget. Our community is very excited about the $115 million allocation for an all-electric bus depot in Macquarie Park. The Macquarie Park electric bus depot will be the first purpose-built zero emissions bus depot in the whole of New South Wales. It'll house 165 electric buses and deliver 160 jobs. Electric buses will service our local routes, meaning lower emissions in Bennelong and, importantly, quieter buses in residential areas.</para>
<para>In addition, the government is providing an additional $10 million for the Macquarie Park bus interchange and precinct—something those opposite promised way back in 2017. This was announced by Prime Minister Turnbull. Remember him?</para>
<para><inline font-style="italic">A division having been called in the House of Representatives</inline>—</para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 17:37 to 17:45</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LAXALE</name>
    <name.id>299174</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>You can't deliver a bus interchange with just a press release; you need funds and hard work. Since coming to government, I've been pushing to get the Macquarie Park bus interchange out of the ground. The additional $10 million provision on top of the $80 million already secured will improve the efficiency and connectivity of our public transport network and create a much-needed public plaza precinct in the centre of Macquarie Park. It does not end there. Over the next five years, the Roads to Recovery funding for councils in Bennelong will total an impressive $24 million. This funding will ensure that our local roads will remain maintained and improved.</para>
<para>But it is not just in Bennelong that our government is deeply committed to delivering infrastructure funding. As a former mayor, I know how much communities rely on programs like Roads to Recovery to help fund local projects. In good news for councils and communities, the Roads to Recovery program will progressively rise from $500 million to $1 billion per year. This means more local road upgrades delivered through local governments right into local communities nationwide. This extra funding will help make our roads safer, fix potholes, build crossings and roundabouts where they are needed.</para>
<para>Speaking of safety, we know how important it is for the federal government to contribute to our Vision Zero goal. We are providing $10.8 million for a one-year national road safety awareness campaign and $21.1 million over four years to improve national road safety data reporting by the National Road Safety Data Hub. These are important investments to help our nation reach its Vision Zero goal of zero road deaths by 2050.</para>
<para>I've got a confession to make: I am a middle-aged man in lycra and I am not ashamed of it; I embrace it. As a proud MAMIL, anything the government can do to make cycling safer should be applauded. I've got news, Deputy Speaker Scymgour. You'll be pleased to know that this budget delivers to MAMILs as well. Labor has established a $100 million new active transport fund, which will help state governments develop and construct new bicycle and shared paths across the country. A safer space to ride will help more people switch to cycling to get around, reduce the pressure on our local roads and promote zero-emissions transport, all while people get a bit of exercise while they get around. The active transport program also includes funding for footpaths and other active transport. Guidelines will be developed in consultation with states and territories and are expected to be made public by 1 July 2025.</para>
<para>While Labor gets on with delivering strong, sustainable and well-planned infrastructure projects for Australia, let's take a second to think anything about what the Liberals and Nationals did during their 10 years of negligence. While those opposite were in government, they inflated the number of projects from 150 to over 800 but they didn't do any work to deliver them. It was mismanagement galore. Many of these projects were plagued by poor planning, inadequate costings and lack of readiness for Commonwealth investment. This was not just incompetence; it was a deliberate strategy. They went to their colour-coded spreadsheet seats, made these announcements, got in the local paper then did not do the work to get them started. They were all announcement, no delivery; all press release, no pavement. But unlike the Liberals, Labor is committed to getting projects out of the ground. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FLETCHER</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
    <electorate>Bradfield</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak about the arts aspects of the budget and begin by expressing my disappointment that the Minister for the Arts has not bothered to grace us with his presence, which is further evidence of the contempt shown by the Albanese Labor government and its senior figures for important mechanisms of parliamentary accountability, including consideration in detail in relation to the appropriations bill. We hear a lot of rhetoric from this government about its support for the arts and its enthusiasm for the arts, but the simple fact is that we've not seen action that matches the rhetoric. In the last budget, we were told that Labor would establish a First Nations led body dedicated to First Nations work and that they would establish Writing Australia. Twelve months later, these entities have not been established.</para>
<para>In the last budget, the Labor government claimed that it would increase international investment in the Australian screen industry to provide domestic employment and training opportunities by increasing the location offset rebate to 30 per cent. Here they were seeking to build on the very successful track record of the Location Incentive program introduced by the last government, which attracted more than 30 global screen productions, created thousands of jobs and built considerable momentum, rather than the boom-bust mentality and reality which we had had for many years in the Australian screen production sector when it came to attracting global screen productions to be produced here. Twelve months on, we've still not seen the legislation take effect to increase the location offset to 30 per cent. Industry stakeholders are complaining that this government is keeping them in a state of uncertainty, and of course investors are holding back on making investments in film projects as they wait to see whether Labor is actually going to deliver on its rhetoric.</para>
<para>We of course at the start of this government's term had the much-hyped national cultural policy, with sweeping claims that it would transform the arts sector in Australia, but many in the arts sector, understandably, feel that the rhetoric got well ahead of the reality. Of course Labor's home-grown inflation and cost-of-living crisis is having a dramatic effect on music festivals, with festival after festival being cancelled around the country—the 2023 edition of the Falls Festival, Valley Ways, Coastal Jam and Vintage Vibes. We have seen the pausing of Hobart's iconic Dark Mofo for 2024. Venues like Brisbane's The Zoo are closing their doors. This sector is crying out for help, and those cries are falling on deaf ears. The live music sector contributes an estimated $5.7 billion to the Australian economy, so the announced $8.6 million is a drop in the ocean. It's no wonder that publications like <inline font-style="italic">The Conversation</inline> have expressed the opinion that the Australian live music industry is in crisis.</para>
<para>In contrast to the hopeless approach of the current government, the previous government had a strong commitment to funding the arts. We delivered record Commonwealth arts funding in 2021-22, with more than $1 billion for the arts. No government since then has matched that funding. We allocated $200 million to our RISE fund to support 541 shows, performances, festivals and events around the country because what we believe in is getting more shows put on. What Labor believe in is employing more bureaucrats in Canberra; that's what gets them excited. It's not production; it is more bureaucrats.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">A division having been called in the House of Representatives—</inline></para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 17:52 to 18:01</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FLETCHER</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Let me ask the following questions: When will the First Nations led board be established? When will Writers Australia be established? When will the government deliver on its promise to increase the location offset to 30 per cent? How many musical festivals have been cancelled under the Labor government? How many more bureaucrats in the arts area have been hired since this government took office, and how many extra bureaucrats will be hired as a result of decisions under this budget? What effect has the hiring of additional bureaucrats in Music Australia had in stimulating and restoring a vibrant Australian music sector? What tangible outcomes has the National Cultural Policy delivered to artists? Why has money been shifted to establishing more bureaucratic roles in Canberra? Why did Minister Burke in one of his first acts fail to spend the remaining $20 million that was left in the RISE fund which could have allowed additional shows, festivals, events and productions to occur? All of these are mysteries of Burkean arts administration, which all Australians of goodwill wonder about, and we would be well served if these mysteries were solved.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STANLEY</name>
    <name.id>265990</name.id>
    <electorate>Werriwa</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm excited to have the opportunity to speak about what is in this budget, the Albanese government's third budget, and what it delivers for Australians. For the past decade we had become accustomed to announcements without substance and press releases in place of projects. This is what defined infrastructure for almost a decade, so much so that the infrastructure investment pipeline worth $120 billion had become clogged and bogged down with projects that were announced but never delivered. That's why the Albanese government announced an independent and comprehensive review of the pipeline and responded to its recommendations late last year, cleaning up the mess that was left behind.</para>
<para>Because of the Albanese government's management, and because this government is focused on projects that can actually be delivered, the most recent budget committed additional funding for my part of Australia, Western Sydney. Announced early in May, the Albanese government is investing an additional $1.9 billion for infrastructure projects across Western Sydney—projects that can actually be delivered and will benefit the communities that surround them, projects that will significantly benefit some of the most congested and traffic-prone roads in Western Sydney, helping our locals get to and from work faster so that they can spend more time with their families. Funded in this year's budget is a new infrastructure package for Western Sydney that delivers 14 new projects and provides additional funding for two existing projects. Those projects include upgrades to Mamre Road, Elizabeth Drive, Appin Road, Mulgoa Road, Memorial Avenue and Garfield Road, to name a few.</para>
<para>But this investment is also about the future, with additional funding allocated to planning projects such as the Cambridge Avenue upgrade, the Western Sydney Freight Line Stage 1 final business case, Western Sydney roads future planning, and a business case for the south-west Sydney rail link. This government understands the importance of real and tangible infrastructure upgrades as well as laying the foundations for future development. That is why the budget delivers for all our communities in Western Sydney. The Albanese government's investment in Western Sydney infrastructure now totals $17.3 billion—more than the previous coalition government's and in projects that we are genuinely committed to delivering.</para>
<para>But this budget's investment in infrastructure doesn't end here. The government is delivering on nation building infrastructure projects across Australia, with the budget providing $16.5 billion in funding for new and existing projects that focus on improving productivity, liveability and sustainability. The investment will drive economic growth and productivity while also creating jobs and ensuring that our cities, suburbs and regions are liveable. That is the purpose of infrastructure investments—a purpose that seemed to have been forgotten under previous governments. The budget also delivers an additional $1 billion to support state and territories to build enabling infrastructure, which will help deliver greater housing supply across the country, building on the Albanese government's Housing Support Program, which delivers $500 million for enabling infrastructure.</para>
<para>The Albanese government also acknowledges the importance of local roads in our community. After all, these are the roads that are used most often by Australians; they are the very roads they live on. The government is also committed to making our roads safer. Over the past few years my community has seen the effects of several flooding and extreme weather events that have left roads in a miserable state and less safe for drivers. That's why this budget has committed $4.4 billion under the Roads to Recovery program over the next five years, with funding to progressively double the $1 billion annually, providing funding certainty. Under the Roads to Recovery program, funding will be provided to local councils to ensure long-term maintenance of local road networks and critical road safety measures. That funding is to fill potholes, improve drainage and repair pavement. They're things that make a huge difference to the safety of our roads. New South Wales councils will receive $1.2 billion over five years, an increase of $461 million under the Albanese government.</para>
<para>I look forward to seeing local councils in Werriwa finally use this funding to improve the state of our local roads. After a decade of neglect, this Albanese Labor government is delivering the proper infrastructure investment that I've been fighting for since 2016, and it's what our local communities deserve.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr COLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>241067</name.id>
    <electorate>Banks</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to talk about the government's response on the totemic issue of online safety and particularly age verification as it relates to social media and pornography and some other things online. There are two big problems here. The first is what has happened in the past, and the second is what we are told is going to happen in the future.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">A division having been called in the House of Representatives—</inline></para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 18:08 to 18:28</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I remind honourable members that the schedule for tonight's debate is fixed, so the member for Banks won't be allowed to continue. I'll go straight to the end of the Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts portfolio debate in accordance with resolution agreed to by the House on 28 May 2024. The question is that the proposed expenditure for the Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts portfolio be agreed to.</para>
<para>Proposed expenditure agreed to.</para>
<para>Prime Minister and Cabinet Portfolio</para>
<para>Proposed expenditure: $3,070,423,000</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BURNEY</name>
    <name.id>8GH</name.id>
    <electorate>Barton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank all the honourable members for their interest in this portfolio. Australians across the country have called on us to deliver for Indigenous Australians. I'm happy to outline to the Chamber how our government is doing exactly that. Our 2024 budget builds on the significant work we have done to date, because our government is delivering for Indigenous Australians. We are getting on with the job of improving lives. By working with communities to close the gap, we are making a difference.</para>
<para>The week before the government delivered its 2024 budget I was in Maningrida in Arnhem Land. In that community we are building more houses so kids have the space they need to grow up, in safe, secure homes, because we know that overcrowding is a serious handbrake on closing the gap. The budget builds on our strong record of delivery, and the government is making serious investments in closing the gap. We're improving housing with a 10-year plan to halve overcrowding in remote Northern Territory communities. Our $4 billion joint investment with the Northern Territory government will build up to 270 houses each year, and it will fund repairs and maintenance to existing houses. This landmark package means more families across the Northern Territory will live in better quality housing.</para>
<para>We're investing in mental health, suicide prevention and family wellbeing by expanding coverage of the Closing the Gap PBS Co-Payment Program to all PBS medicines. We are making medicines cheaper for eligible First Nations patients. Better access to affordable medicines means better progress on closing the gap.</para>
<para>We're also funding programs that support First Nations students, including $32.8 million for the Clontarf Foundation. Their programs keep First Nations boys and young men engaged in school and education. We are funding legal services and investing in community led approaches to justice. This includes $76.2 million to establish a new First Nations prison-to-employment program; $15.4 million for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Legal Services; and an additional $8.6 million to family violence prevention legal services as part of the Attorney-General's funding boost for legal assistance.</para>
<para>Another key part of our budget is the next stage of replacing the failed Community Development program, creating real jobs, proper wages and decent conditions. Those real jobs—3,000 of them—will help deliver services in communities. Our Remote Jobs and Economic Development Program will make a difference. It is a $777.4 million program that will be implemented in partnership with First Nations people. It will build the skills and experience of Indigenous Australians in remote communities and it will help to deliver services to those communities in need.</para>
<para>Health, housing, jobs, education, justice—our government has been hard at work delivering for Indigenous Australians. We've been working with communities to deliver real things that improve lives. Our budget invests in things that will help close the gap and build a better future.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LEY</name>
    <name.id>00AMN</name.id>
    <electorate>Farrer</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>After the Prime Minister set high expectations for women's safety, I have to say that this year's budget is a disappointment for victims of family and domestic violence. There have been at least 26 women allegedly killed as a result of domestic and family violence this year and many others killed at the hands of violent male perpetrators. We know that at least 39 children have lost a mother. These are sobering and shocking statistics as we only enter June, and the government's big budget announcement was to continue a support payment the coalition established in 2021.</para>
<para>Frankly, this is just not good enough. It's not good enough given that the Albanese Labor government promised to end domestic violence in a generation. A generation is 20 years. Two years in, we are not on track to meet this promise, and data shows that we're going in the wrong direction. This is not a personal political attack on the government. This is a benchmark the government set itself and a benchmark it is not meeting. Here we are, two years into this term, and the violence is getting worse. We must hold this government to account for the safety of women and children across Australia. No-one forced them to promise the women of Australia that they would end domestic violence, but it is a promise they made. It's a promise they were only too willing to highlight in the media. So I'm calling on them to do more to deliver what they promised.</para>
<para>Just as we endorsed some sensible measures in Labor's first two budgets, we do the same in its third budget. We support the extension of emergency payments to support women and children fleeing domestic violence—a policy the coalition established in 2021 as the escaping violence payment. The coalition has also given its immediate and full support to funding for crisis and transitional accommodation. We support the rapid review into best-practice domestic violence prevention approaches that was reannounced last week. The coalition supports a prevention approach to family and domestic violence and for that to be the focus of this review. But I once again call on the government to demonstrate proper accountability and confirm the date when this review will be reporting. How can they call it a rapid review and not even provide a reporting date?</para>
<para>We're also calling on the government to be upfront about funding frontline services. Dozens of women have been violently killed in Australia since the start of the year, and women's organisations have widely criticised the government for failing to properly fund frontline services in their budget. Overnight it was revealed that not two, not 44 but now only 67 of the 500 frontline and community workers promised back in October 2022 are on the ground providing vital support. The minister revised her promise to say that 352 would be on the ground this financial year, but even this is not on track. It's well off track. In the Prime Minister's own state of New South Wales, only six workers are on the ground—six of 148. They should be tracking for 118 workers next financial year, but we aren't even into double digits. These are not just figures. These are workers that should be out there supporting women and children experiencing family and domestic violence, supporting the LGBTIQA+ community, supporting women with disability, supporting culturally and linguistically diverse women and children and supporting First Nations people.</para>
<para>Budgets are about choices. Domestic violence is raging. It's a national crisis. It demands greater action. Australians were promised that women's safety would be a priority, and I'm not sure that we're seeing that backed up today. The government's answer, when asked about more funding, is, 'We have done what we have done,' but that excuse is hard for women to stomach when we see waste in political spending hand over fist. Anthony Albanese and Jim Chalmers have allocated $45 million for an advertising campaign to promote a Future Made in Australia, and $300 million of energy relief payments will go to owners of unoccupied homes. Minister Bill Shorten is paying over $600,000 for his own personal speechwriter while domestic violence payment processing times, administered by his own Services Australia, have blown out from two days to as high as 11 days under this government. So I ask: is women's safety really a priority of this government?</para>
<para>The budget was criticised for not properly funding frontline services. It has all the wrong priorities. This is unconscionable when frontline domestic violence services are crying out for support. The Prime Minister said he would prioritise women's safety, and frontline services are turning away women because they didn't get any money from this budget. I am incensed that women in need continue to miss out because Anthony Albanese's priorities are all wrong.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SCRYMGOUR</name>
    <name.id>F2S</name.id>
    <electorate>Lingiari</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise in support of the landmark investments from the Albanese Labor government in Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2024-2025 that will significantly improve outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. I'll particularly highlight the many practical benefits these investments will deliver for First Nations people and communities in my electorate of Lingiari. Successfully managing issues of importance to Aboriginal Australians takes courage and involves a long-term vision. With the measures included in this appropriation bill, Prime Minister Albanese and Minister Burney will make a real difference to the lives of Aboriginal people in communities across Australia. The federal government understands the challenge facing Indigenous workforce development, particularly in remote communities of my electorate of Lingiari. I applaud the Albanese Labor government's Remote Jobs and Economic Development Program that will replace the failed Community Development Program. This new program is on track to commence in the second half of this year. This new program will be delivered in partnership with First Nations people and commit $777.4 million in this year's budget to create jobs that communities want. It will provide a steady pipeline of local workers to meet the growing labour force demands across remote Australia over the next decade. Every Australian has a right to a job and a future. Employment brings economic success. It is critical to closing the gap and improving the life circumstances of our First Nations people.</para>
<para>An issue of great concern to me is the number of people in my electorate who are experiencing homelessness and living in overcrowded housing. One in 20 people in the Northern Territory are experiencing homelessness, and experts say that this situation is worsening, with waitlists up to 10 years for public housing. For those families in my electorate who have a home, recurring problems of overcrowding and poor quality houses often result in adverse health, education and employment outcomes, and increased family violence. The situation is bleak, with the highest levels of overcrowding in Australia occurring in remote communities of my electorate in the Northern Territory.</para>
<para>The importance of the Albanese Labor governments commitment in this year's budget to tackling overcrowding in the Northern Territory remote communities cannot be overstated. This historic $4 billion joint investment with the Northern Territory government provides a 10-year commitment to build 270 houses each year in remote Territory communities, halving overcrowding within a decade. Included in the measure is continued support for repairs to existing houses and an additional $120 million over three years from 2024-25 to construct, repair and upgrade houses and essential infrastructure, which I know has gone down really well in Northern Territory homelands.</para>
<para>Our federal Labor government is meeting complex and multilayered health challenges facing Aboriginal people across Australia, in particular in my electorate where they make up approximately 70 per cent of consumers in the Northern Territory public health system. I congratulate the Albanese Labor government and Minister Burney for the measures they have taken in this year's budget to increase affordable and culturally appropriate health services.</para>
<para>I am pleased that one of the passions I share with the Minister for Indigenous Australians is stemming the devastating effects of foetal alcohol spectrum disorder—FASD—on children, families and in the community. Important work continues under the Central Australia plan to invest in Congress's children and youth assessment and treatment services by providing more early detection and intervention services for neurodevelopmental conditions such as FASD, ADHD and autism. This investment is allowing 200 First Nations children and people each year to receive the needed assessments and doubling Congress's current capacity in increasing community access to these much-needed services.</para>
<para>I am proud of the commitment that we have made in this year's budget to create a better and fairer education system for all Australians. I congratulate Minister Burney on the $18 million additional to the $250 million in the Central Australia plan being invested in this year's budget to build new and improved boarding facilities in Central Australia for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students from remote Northern Territory communities. I have attended many meetings— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WARE</name>
    <name.id>300123</name.id>
    <electorate>Hughes</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2024-2025, particularly on the way that the Labor government had lauded this budget as delivering for Australian women. I want to turn specifically to some areas where we say the government could have done better and needs to. Women's safety: improving the safety of women and girls must be a priority of this government, of all governments. As I stand here today, a woman has been killed in Australia every four days this year—shocking, appalling, crisis point, frightful. We need more descriptors. We not only need stronger descriptors but we need stronger action and collaboration, stronger policies and real solutions. We need stronger delivery on the Prime Minister's promise to eradicate domestic violence in a decade.</para>
<para>I do commend the government for extending the Escaping Violence Payment. This is where emergency payments of $5,000—$1,500 in cash and $3,500 in goods—can be provided to support women and children fleeing domestic violence and trying to start their new lives in safety. The coalition established this payment in 2021, and the government is to be commended for extending this payment. Unfortunately though, with the housing crisis we're currently facing this payment means that many women will still not be able to find adequate housing, particularly in social housing. Median wait times for social housing across some parts of New South Wales are now up to five years.</para>
<para>The government's proposed solution was through its failed Housing Australia Future Fund. We've heard today that so far that fund has paid out $30 million in 12 months in external consultancies and executive salaries without delivering a single house, social housing or otherwise. It's built nothing to house women fleeing domestic violence. It is therefore incumbent upon the Prime Minister to do more to address this housing crisis, and that includes finding solutions for single women.</para>
<para>The coalition has committed to allowing separated women the opportunity to use part of their superannuation to put towards a home to help them restart their lives. This is said in circumstances where a 2023 Victorian parliamentary inquiry found that only 34 per cent of women who separated managed to own a home within five years and only 44 per cent within 10 years. Divorced women are also three times more likely to rent at the age of 65 than married women. The best way to empower women, to enable them to secure long-term safety and financial security, is through home ownership. The coalition understands this.</para>
<para>Women fleeing domestic violence situations need far more frontline workers. We have appalling statistics around our country. Solutions to family and domestic violence to provide women with emergency support is through increased frontline services. The Albanese Labor government did commit to funding 500 frontline service and community workers; however, that commitment was made back in October 2022, and we've already heard that there is still a massive shortfall in the delivery of that policy. To date, in the Prime Minister's own state of New South Wales, my home state, only six workers are on the ground. That's six of 148 that were promised by the Prime Minister. Women are being turned away from services because of the failure of the government to deliver the policies and the promises that it has made.</para>
<para>I turn now to women's health. Labor heralded its federal budget as putting women's health as a central component. That is to be commended. Many Australian women suffer from chronic pelvic pain—conditions such as endometriosis, polycystic ovarian syndrome—that is debilitating, distressing and impairing their ability to live their lives to the fullest. It is welcome that the government, in this budget, is continuing to build on the significant work commenced by the coalition in this critical area. The coalition has demonstrated its commitment to women's health. It has committed to undertake a review of women's health items on the MBS and the PBS. It's supporting measures and developing policies around menopause and perimenopause, and has committed to grant $4 million to Ovarian Cancer Australia.</para>
<para>I conclude by observing that the budget provided some responses to address significant contemporary issues facing Australian women in areas of safety, health and financial security. However, this budget could have been and should have been so much more rigorous, more generous and more understanding of the needs of Australian women. Australian women and girls deserve better.</para>
<para>Proposed expenditure agreed to.</para>
<para>Education Portfolio</para>
<para>Proposed expenditure, $2,811,335,000</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr ALY</name>
    <name.id>13050</name.id>
    <electorate>Cowan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Before I start, I might just add that the Minister for Education is currently chairing a meeting but will be here at the end of this to do the sum up. In the meantime, I'm really proud to stand up here and talk about the achievements of the Albanese government—a government that understands the value of education.</para>
<para>Labor knows that education has the ability to transform lives, to break poverty cycles and to open up those doors of opportunity. I have said this before because I know this—because education changed my life. In our first two budgets, the Albanese government delivered significant investments in education, and I'd like to start particularly with early childhood education. We've made early childhood education more affordable for more than one million families across Australia. We've made investments to help retain our quality, highly skilled early childhood education workforce whilst also attracting new people into the profession, and we've made early childhood education more accessible for First Nations children.</para>
<para>The budget builds on this investment as we chart a course to a world-class, universal early childhood education and care system. In this budget, in early childhood education and care, we've provisioned funding towards a wage increase for the early childhood education and care workforce. This is an important step, a fairly significant step, to properly valuing and recognising this profession and building a stable and sustainable workforce. The Productivity Commission and the ACCC have both told us that building that workforce is vital to realising our vision of a world-class, universal early childhood education system that is accessible, affordable and inclusive. We cannot achieve this without a quality early learning workforce, and we know that the key to this is wages. That's why we're taking action now to make a wage increase a reality, with $30 million to build the IT and payment systems that will be needed to deliver on this important commitment.</para>
<para>In this year's budget, we're also continuing to ensure more children are able to access the transformational benefits of early childhood education, with a further $98.4 million for the Inclusion Support Program. This budget is also making significant investments in schools and higher education—for all education from birth right through life. We're delivering on the Albanese Labor commitment and our plan to build a better and fairer education system from early childhood education to school education and tertiary education.</para>
<para>In schools, the Albanese government is offering the biggest increase in federal funding to public schools that has ever been delivered. This includes more than $785 million for my home state of Western Australia to fully fund all public schools in WA by 2026. In higher education, we're responding to the Australian Universities Accord, including by providing cost-of-living relief for students and making tertiary education more accessible. These investments include wiping $3 billion in student debt, fixing the indexation of HELP loans, helping students overcome placement poverty with prac payments and preparing students for university with fee-free uni-ready courses.</para>
<para>All of these commitments are just the start of how our Labor government is also continuing to deliver for young people—for youth. Of course, my other portfolio is in youth. This budget helps young people with immediate challenges while also setting them up for the future. Investments in this budget directly address what young people have told us were the top priorities for them through our national youth consultations that we undertook last year. This includes not only measures in the Education portfolio that provide greater access to affordable and free education and training but also measures in other portfolios that provide cost-of-living relief and mental health support, address climate change and improve housing affordability and rent costs. We're also implementing initiatives outlined in Engage!—a strategy to include young people in the decisions we make.</para>
<para>So we remain committed to empowering young people to play a role in shaping the government policy and programs that matter to them. Through the Education portfolio, we remain committed to a fairer, more equitable and inclusive education system for all, from early childhood right through to school and right through to university, because we know that that's what sets up Australians for opportunity and success. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FLETCHER</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
    <electorate>Bradfield</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I begin by expressing my dismay that the Minister for Education could not be bothered to attend this important consideration-in-detail process. We heard all kinds of rhetoric from Labor before they came to government about their commitment to parliamentary accountability and scrutiny, but, yet again, the minister is treating this process with contempt, as we have seen done by a number of other ministers during this consideration-in-detail process.</para>
<para>Perhaps the Minister for Education is embarrassed about attending—to speak, for example, about the challenge of rising student debt levels. The fact is that Australian students are facing a HECS debt crisis under the Albanese Labor government. For three million Australians with a student debt, HELP loans have escalated by almost 16 per cent since the Albanese government was elected. Under the former coalition government, the average indexation rate was just 1.7 per cent, compared to that 16 per cent increase we've seen under the Albanese Labor government.</para>
<para>Now, the minister announced on 5 May that, in response to the Australian Universities Accord, the government will cap the HELP indexation rate. Labor said it would 'cut the student debt of more than three million Australians' in this month's budget. However, just two days later, on 7 May, the Australian Taxation Office confirmed that student loans would be indexed at the higher rate of 4.7 per cent from 1 June 2024, making a mockery of Labor's announcement.</para>
<para>Labor has treated the university research sector with disdain. The government has cut $102 million from university research programs delivered by the coalition, and, with research currently sitting at 1.7.9 per cent of GDP, this government is on track to break its pre-election promise that it would increase research funding to three per cent of GDP. Labor's budget also confirmed that the proposed Australian Tertiary Education Commission, due to start on 1 January 2025, has not been funded, which makes any rational observer really doubt the depth of Labor's commitment and the commitment that it's made to overturn the Job-ready Graduates program. In breach of its election commitment, Labor has simply delivered a school funding war by failing to provide on its commitment to so-called full and fair funding for public schools in the budget.</para>
<para>With one in three students failing NAPLAN, it's critical that the government delivers the reforms required to raise academic standards so that every child can reach his or her potential. This requires an unwavering commitment to evidence based teaching methods.</para>
<para>Of course, one other issue which is of significant concern under this government is the issue of student safety on university campuses. There's been an alarming rise in antisemitism since the appalling Hamas terrorist attack in Israel on 7 October 2023, and yet what we have seen is a distinct failure of leadership from the government and from some vice-chancellors, including the tacit acceptance of encampments and other protest activity, which is fuelling incitement and hate. There must be zero tolerance of antisemitism, which is why the coalition is calling on the Prime Minister to back a judicial inquiry into antisemitism on university campuses. I urge the government to support the private member's bill introduced by the member for Berowra which aims to establish just such a judicial inquiry.</para>
<para>I turn to questions for the minister. My first question is: given the right of everybody to be safe on a university campus, why has the minister failed to adopt a zero tolerance approach to antisemitism, including not speaking out in relation to encampments which are fuelling incitement and hate on a number of university campuses? On 5 May, why did the minister promise to lower HELP indexation on 1 June, when he knew this could not be delivered? Where is the legislation to enact these changes? And why did the minister not act earlier? In the face of Labor's 'big Australia' policy, what does the minister say to regional and smaller universities and private higher education providers, which have been hit hard by this government's discriminatory international student visa policies and now face a very uncertain future? Can the minister explain how payments for mandatory student prac placements will be delivered and why so many students are missing out, including those who are studying speech pathology, veterinary science, medicine, engineering and clinical psychology? With the next National School Reform Agreement in limbo, where are the school reforms that the member for Blaxland promised? I hope he answers these questions. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SITOU</name>
    <name.id>298121</name.id>
    <electorate>Reid</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Bradfield for his sudden interest in the universities sector, because it was wanting for the time they were in government. Let us take a trip down memory lane to when we had COVID and those opposite introduced JobKeeper to help keep the economy afloat. Which was the sector they ignored during that entire period? It was the universities sector. They changed the rules for JobKeeper not once, not twice but three times to deny JobKeeper to the universities sector. What did that mean? It meant that that sector suffered the biggest job loss it had ever seen—estimates of about 12,000 jobs lost in that sector because those opposite refused to provide support. They provided support to Harvey Norman, yes, but not to the universities sector. And now they have truly just discovered the importance of the universities sector. I do welcome this new discovery, because the only way they ever discover the universities sector is when they want to interfere with research grants. That's the only time they show any interest. So, I welcome the fact that they are showing interest today.</para>
<para>The universities sector is something that all of us on this side of the House are very interested in. I know that the Minister for Education is very interested in it, and I got to visit the Australian Catholic University's Strathfield campus in my electorate with the Minister for Education and the Assistant Minister for Health, Ged Kearney. We got to meet with some fantastic students who are studying teaching, nursing, midwifery, and social work. When I got to sit around the table and have chats with them, so many of them had incredible stories about why there were studying these degrees.</para>
<para>One student who was studying social work told me the reason she wanted to study social work was that she and her mother had experienced really difficult forms of domestic violence and there was a social worker who came into their lives and helped make it better, and she wanted to do that for others. I met a mother of three kids who was retraining to become a nurse because she had had such great care when she had a really awful miscarriage. She wanted to be able to go on and give other people that type of care. I spoke to a young man who had an affinity with Indigenous Australians, and he wanted to work with young Indigenous Australians so that they could reach their full potential. They all had amazing stories about why they had chosen these career paths.</para>
<para>One thing none of these students spoke about was money. None of them spoke about having high-flying, high-paying jobs. They did it for the love of it. What they did talk to me about was how challenging it was trying to complete their mandatory prac placements. Many of them were having to complete 1,000 hours, sometimes up to 1,600 hours, of mandatory prac placement, along with their part-time work and their study. Some of them were at breaking point. One young student who was studying teaching told me about how he worked on the weekends in his local butcher and when he was doing his mandatory prac placement at a school there was a period when he had to work seven days a week for seven weeks, and he was exhausted. By the end of it he almost thought of just giving it all up. He told me some of his friends did just give up their teaching degrees. We don't want them to do this. We want these people who are committed, who want to make a difference, who want to help future generations to continue with these degrees.</para>
<para>So I'm so proud of this government's commitment to helping provide income support to these students during their mandatory prac placements so that they can concentrate on learning those valuable skills when they're out in the classroom or in the hospital and that they can complete their degrees and go on to become the great nurses, teachers, midwives and social workers that we desperately need in this country. This is a change that is going to make a difference to those people's lives and to the lives of so many in this country.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELL</name>
    <name.id>282981</name.id>
    <electorate>Moncrieff</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's disappointing that the minister for this portfolio, an important portfolio, has not turned up for this consideration in detail and has instead sent his junior minister to speak on his behalf. It is very disappointing for Australians and certainly this side of the chamber. I was reading through my consideration-in-detail speech from last year and my opening line then was, 'It has been 12 months since the Albanese government came to power and, unlike the Prime Minister's repeated promises, I haven't met an Australian who is better off under Labor.' That still seems to be the case, because two years later, three budgets later, I can say that that statement still stands. In fact, I'm yet to meet any Australian who is better off now than they were two years ago when the government came to power, or an Australian who felt safer or more secure than they did two years ago, because the reality is that Australians always suffer under Labor. They can see through the thinly-veiled lies and carefully crafted messages from Labor's best—and expensive—spin doctors.</para>
<para>Australians know their housing and rental costs are higher now than they were two years ago. They can see that gas and electricity bills have skyrocketed since 2021-22. In fact, a typical Australian household with a mortgage is $35,000 a year worse off under this Labor government than they were under the coalition. Like many Australians, I was pretty disappointed with this year's budget. As I flicked through the pages of the budget paper 2, I thought, 'Wow, we are a little light on early childhood education.' You might say, 'Surely, there was a measure to help bring down the increasing cost of early childhood education,' which has already risen back up—I say to the minister—again by 7.1 per cent in less than 12 months. Sadly, there was nothing, no relief from Labor for those families who are struggling to make ends meet and who pay for the cost of their early childhood education.</para>
<para>If there is no support for families to cover their rising out-of-pocket costs, maybe there is some funding for families who have no access at all to early childhood education. I'm talking about families who live in regional, rural and remote areas across our country, families who don't work a standard nine-to-five, and families who are stuck languishing on those very long waiting lists or who can only get a day or two when they really need more than that. If you're one of those families holding out for help, you will also be very disappointed because there's nothing to increase access to early childhood education in this budget.</para>
<para>The government and the minister like to talk about no Australian being worse off under them and no child being left behind. What they conveniently forget to tell you is those statements don't apply to anyone who lives in a regional, rural or remote area. We know that, in many cases, children living in regional areas are more likely to start developmentally behind when compared to children living in our capital cities, yet this government has no plans to support children and their families in regional areas, just no plans. Do you know what they do have plans for? They have plans for 36,000 new public servants in Canberra. That's right. The government loves to talk about how important access to early learning is for children and their parents but, when it comes down to it, they would rather spend money on more Commonwealth employees than the future of this country.</para>
<para>I ask: with fees already skyrocketing, Minister, how do you plan to deliver cost-of-living relief to families accessing early childhood education? Minister, what plans do you have to increase access for the many families across Australia who are stuck on waiting lists and struggling to pay their bills because many of them have no access?</para>
<para>The Prime Minister said that this budget was for all Australians. What a great line, but it was probably crafted by his media unit because that is all it was—a line—because this is not a budget for all Australians and it most certainly is not a budget for families with young children who need access to early learning. It's a budget full of despair and broken promises—a budget from a Labor government that lied to get into power, divided us and then broke the spirit of so many through reckless policies and spending. They have killed the great Australian dream of homeownership, have crushed small businesses and are draining our regions dry. Australians deserve better than another three years of hard Labor.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BYRNES</name>
    <name.id>299145</name.id>
    <electorate>Cunningham</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Australians certainly deserve better than another 10 years of those opposite, let me tell you. It is great to be here with the Minister for Education. I have had some fabulous feedback in my electorate when talking to young people about the changes to student debt, which are wiping $3 billion of student debt. The young people of my electorate are very grateful. It's also great to be here with the Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth. The Minister for Early Childhood Education and Minister for Youth was an absolute rock star in my electorate. We visited the Kids' Uni and we went to Early Start. We got to play out in the playground and talk to early childhood educators, and we also had a great forum with young people where we talked about fashion and the minister's great ability to crochet a dress. We also spoke about music festivals, education and mental health. So I really thank both ministers for their contribution to my electorate. I know the people of Cunningham are very grateful for the work that they do.</para>
<para>I am very proud to be a part of an Albanese Labor government which is focusing on increasing access, equity and quality in education. Labor governments through the decades have been responsible for introducing some of the world's most envied institutions and initiatives, and education is no different. We introduced Medicare, superannuation, the NDIS and HECS. Not only do we implement these life-changing systems but we are also the only government that continues to strengthen and improve them and make sure that they are sustainable into the future.</para>
<para>We're fixing the HECS system and cutting the student debt of more than three million Australians. This is providing $3 billion in direct support to our students and graduates who had been struggling with the rising cost of living. In response to the Australian Universities Accord, we will cap the HELP indexation rate to be the lower of either the CPI or the WPI, with effect from 1 June. This will benefit every student across the country, including, most importantly, every student at the University of Wollongong with a HELP debt and every tradie at Wollongong TAFE with a VET student loan. We have listened to our community and their concerns, and we are legislating to make the system simpler and fairer.</para>
<para>This reform directly addresses last year's 7.1 per cent spike in CPI, and we're making sure that student debt will never rise faster than your wage. We know that last year's indexation made it impossible for students to get ahead, and that's why we're backdating this to June last year. This also means that any graduate who paid off their HELP loan during the year will receive an indexation credit once the legislation has passed and the ATO has processed the indexation credit. For those out there wondering what this means in real terms for their loan, an individual with an average HELP debt of $45,000 will see over $2,000 wiped from their outstanding debt, and this measure will help students now and also help students into the future.</para>
<para>The Universities Accord was also clear that we need a lot more students at university and TAFE to deliver the large and skilled workforce that Australian needs for the future. We are providing $350 million in additional Commonwealth Grant Scheme funding over four years to fully fund fee-free Uni Ready courses to provide more students with the pathway into higher education, with a focus on students from underrepresented backgrounds. This will result in 30,000 students studying in fee-free Uni Ready courses like those offered at UOW College each year by 2030, an increase of 40 per cent in student numbers and doubling the number of students by 2040.</para>
<para>We are also establishing the Commonwealth prac payment that I spoke about earlier to support students undertaking mandatory work placements as part of their qualifications. I know how stressful it can be juggling work and study commitments, and I am proud to be part of a Labor government that is supporting students in real and tangible ways. The new payment will be for eligible students studying teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work. It will provide around 68,000 eligible higher education students and over 5,000 VET students each year with $319.50 per week during their placement. We are investing in our students and investing in our future workforce.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHESTER</name>
    <name.id>IPZ</name.id>
    <electorate>Gippsland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I think I can say without any fear of contradiction that every member in this place values education, whether it's early childhood education, or primary, secondary or tertiary education. I think there's a shared passion across the chamber that we want to see the best possible outcome for our young Australians. I note the presence of the minister here today, and I'd suggest that he and I are on a unity ticket when we say that we got elected to try and make sure kids in our electorates could achieve their full potential through the education system. I remember the member opposite—the minister—when he had jet black hair. I think he has found, since taking on the ministerial role, that nothing is easy in a ministerial office and that achieving good public policy is not a question of 'set and forget'. So I do commend the minister for his aspirations on behalf of young people in Australia, but I particularly want to draw his attention to the plight of rural and regional students in pursuit of their tertiary goals.</para>
<para>I know the minister understands that there are barriers to young people in rural and regional Australia achieving their full potential. Part of the barrier, without any question at all, is a barrier of aspiration. It's a barrier for us in our own communities and as leaders in our communities in terms of making sure that young people realise that they can be something they've never seen before—that they can be the first person in their family to attend university and become a doctor, a nurse or an engineer. But there are also economic barriers. The previous government recognised this as well. The coalition government, in our time in office, worked to try and reduce the economic barriers for young people forced to move away from home to attend university. But this is not an area of public policy where you can 'set and forget'. There's no question that there are some specific issues right now facing regional students that this minister will have to overcome.</para>
<para>We had a system in Australia—the HECS or HELP system of deferred payments—which meant that it was easier for more people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds to go on to university, and that's a good system. I understand the minister is about to make some changes in relation to reducing the rate at which those debts increase, but what we're seeing now for our regional students seeking to relocate is that the cost-of-living impacts are so enormous and the accommodation shortage is almost insurmountable for a lot of young people, so much so that we're now seeing students from regional communities who get the marks and get the ATAR score and who are well and truly capable of going on to tertiary studies but for whom those barriers of accommodation and the cost of living to move to a metropolitan area are getting to the point where many are simply saying: 'I'll go into the workforce'—and it's a workforce that is screaming out for skills right now—and they won't actually go on and achieve their full potential by undertaking university studies.</para>
<para>I am not one who thinks for a second that every kid needs to go to university. Getting a trade or doing some vocational training is equally a good choice. But, for those students who want to go on to tertiary studies and want to go to university, we have to do more to reduce the economic barriers. So I do ask the minister: what else is he going to do to ensure that students from regional, rural and remote Australia, including our Indigenous young students, have the funds and the appropriate housing to participate in higher education in the future? This is a barrier that impacts not just the young people themselves; it also becomes a problem for our communities. The mums and dads are making decisions, when their kids reach 12, 13 or 14, and are saying: 'I can't live in a regional community. I need to move closer to the city so I can accommodate my child when they go to university.' It becomes a brain drain from regional communities where we see doctors, teachers, nurses and paramedics say, 'I can't live three or four hours from the city anymore. I need to move closer to the city and closer to a university campus so I can afford to give my children the opportunity to go on to university if they choose to do that.' I do encourage the minister with the work he is doing in relation to reducing those costs, and I single out the issue around supporting the practical placements. I recognise that that it is a new decision. It is a bold decision in terms of being an issue that a lot of students have grappled with, but I do question the minister and urge him to go back to his department and say, 'Why is the scope so limited?' There are other areas of skilled workforce shortages in our communities where students—in allied health, in particular, or veterinary science—would benefit from access to the paid practical placements.</para>
<para>The other question I have for the minister is in relation to the regional university centres. I recognise there have been some expanded opportunities in that regard. I don't think we have fully realised the opportunities and the importance of those centres. I don't think we've fully understood what they could be in the future, so I do urge the minister to keep working with the Regional Commissioner Fiona Nash and with regional MPs who have a lived experience in this area to make sure that we recognise there are local solutions here. People living in those committees are best placed to make those decisions and influence the outcomes to help build aspirations and reduce those economic barriers for regional students.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURNELL</name>
    <name.id>300129</name.id>
    <electorate>Spence</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I appreciate the opportunity to speak on this portfolio as education is a part of my job that I'm very keen to contribute towards. Australian education helps form the backbone of our society as a foundation for both family and community and as platform for our people to live, adapt and thrive regardless of their current environment. It provides Australians with the tools to better themselves and those around them, no matter their social or economic conditions.</para>
<para>Quality education is something that lifts people out of disadvantage and into opportunities previously thought distant. It's rightly a priority for a Labor government, and it is essential for the people of Spence. Essentially, because Spence often lacks the advantages of other metropolitan areas in Australia, it is often much harder for people in Spence to access education pathways, particularly at a tertiary level. As it stands, change is needed to ensure that my community is ready to meet our transforming economic landscape as we move into the future. It's for the good of the individual, their communities and Australia at large.</para>
<para>I'm proud to say that under this government, change is coming with a suite of budget measures that place students and all Australians aspiring to learn at a tertiary institution front and centre to rise to that challenge. These include measures to help mitigate placement poverty often felt by students in certain fields like nursing, midwifery, teaching and social work when they undertake unpaid placement programs in order to complete their qualification. Given current cost-of-living pressures especially, it can be hard to make ends meet when studying at university or undertaking vocational programs. This is a known significant barrier for my constituents in achieving higher qualifications after school. These pressures can become even more difficult during required placements often taking four weeks at a time, well away from a student's residence, which then proves highly disruptive and expensive.</para>
<para>Fortunately, this Labor government is one that listens to my community and to students across the country. It is a Labor government with an education minister that is addressing placement poverty through the Commonwealth prac payment introduced in the budget. Every year, from 1 July 2025, an estimated 68,000 eligible higher education students and another 5,000 in VET programs will be provided $319.50 per week during either clinical or professional placements. This means that an aspiring nurse or midwife placed at the Lyell McEwin Hospital in Elizabeth Vale learning valuable skills and assisting where it is needed most can do so with financial pressure lifted. It means that a budding teaching student supporting our future leaders at Kaurna Plains School in Elizabeth will be less likely to consider deferral or withdrawal due to affordability concerns, and it means that a social worker on their way to helping thousands of Australians throughout their career can complete their placement with greater certainty over their circumstances.</para>
<para>There is still a significant challenge for Australia in encouraging greater enrolments and supporting students to complete their programs in order to meet future demand for higher education qualifications. Firstly, in regard to the Commonwealth prac payment, I would like to ask the minister: how will this measure attract greater interest in higher education programs and encourage students to see them through?</para>
<para>Directly relating to this challenge of increasing higher education participation, I would also like to touch upon another significant investment towards our communities by the budget—that of the suburban university study hubs, or SUSHs, to be created in outer metropolitan areas. Their creation is a game changer for outer metropolitan areas. Our community in Spence is one of the most educationally underrepresented metropolitan areas in Australia. There are many in the north who find themselves fundamentally isolated from tertiary education due to factors like cost, distance and visibility in our community. This simply won't do.</para>
<para>The Universities Accord makes this clear: 55 per cent of all jobs by 2050 will need higher education qualifications in order to work in them. To ensure that we are ready for this, the government has set a target of 80 per cent of Australians having a tertiary qualification by the same year. This is where the SUSHs will come in. As introduced under this Labor government, they will smash the barriers to university education in outer metropolitan areas. It is an approach that prioritises student capability, creating safe, accessible and visible learning environments open to all higher education students. This is an investment into local communities that need it most—an investment into our aspiring Australians, regardless of background, to better themselves and their livelihoods. My second question to the minister on the SUSHs is this: how will the SUSH program help achieve the education target set by the government? <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LE</name>
    <name.id>295676</name.id>
    <electorate>Fowler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Minister, as you know, when my mother resettled in Australia she was told that we had the best education system in the world. She knew, as we all do, that the best way to move upwards in terms of economic and personal development is through the education system. It's the best driver of social mobility. For residents of Fowler, the ladder provided by a university education is extremely important, as you know, Deputy Speaker Andrews.</para>
<para>Our people come from amongst the most culturally diverse backgrounds in Australia and from an area of high socioeconomic need. Assistance provided by HECS-HELP and FEE-HELP loans are invaluable. Having harangued the government for two years about the spiking index rate on student loans I was pleased to hear the Treasurer announce that indexing would be changed to reflect the lower of the consumer price index or the wage price index. This current reduction to the WPI will see three million students' loans reduced, and I welcome that. But I have to say that this change is little more than a sticking plaster where surgery is needed. Many may not realise that the WPI has only been lower than the CPI on four occasions this century. Whatever the immediate benefits this policy change will provide, it cannot be described as a permanent solution.</para>
<para>Neither does the budget of 2024 do anything to address the Job-ready Graduates Package of the Morrison government. This package saw a huge increase in the fee costs of arts degrees to shoehorn students into STEM subjects. Whilst we all understand the need for STEM graduates and appreciate the higher wages on offer for such people, this is utilitarian and has discriminatory effects. Women are more likely to study arts degrees, and men are much more likely to study STEM subjects. Women and those with arts degrees are likely to have lower earnings over the course of their lifetime for a variety of logical reasons, so this package discriminates in a way that disadvantages women.</para>
<para>Relying on price signalling in an effort to funnel students into courses that the government minister things are 'good for the country' is patently ridiculous. Students choose areas of study that they are good at and are interested in. That's why arts students have continued to enrol, at increasing personal financial cost, despite this discriminatory policy.</para>
<para>Economist Bruce Chapman, who devised the HECS system, doesn't think that the indexing shift is a sufficient answer, and neither do I. Under the current system, those with student loans must make a payment for their debt once they cross the threshold of annual income currently set at $51,550. Once this threshold is crossed there is a one per cent payment on loans required from the whole amount. This provides a perverse incentive to keep earnings below that amount once a person's earnings approach the threshold. It is also regressive because one per cent is applied regardless of how far above the threshold a person is.</para>
<para>Graduates from Fowler are likely to begin their post-university careers in lower wage brackets. This means that, while they may remain below the repayment threshold for longer, they also face a ballooning HECS loan, as the indexing continues to hike it up. None of this will help them save a deposit for a home loan. They want to pay back these loans, but why aren't repayment thresholds treated more like income tax? Minister, could we look into this? There should be a minimum threshold under which no repayments are necessary and a percentage repayment of earnings above that level. This way the threshold could be reduced below $51,550, with perhaps a higher than one per cent payment on earnings above the minimum amount. This would encourage wage growth and avoid debt ballooning.</para>
<para>The cost of living is going up, and the government is continuing to preside over an inflationary economy. I find there was little in this budget that I could take back to aspiring young people in Fowler to encourage them that their lives would be improved.</para>
<para>Australians demand a lot from our education system because we pay a lot for it. We also expect that our tertiary institutions will have a strong desire to offer education to as many of us as possible, regardless of our social, cultural and financial circumstances.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CLARE</name>
    <name.id>HWL</name.id>
    <electorate>Blaxland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank all members who participated in this debate on education. The member for Fowler told the story of her mother saying that we have the best education system in the world. I'd say we have the best education system in the world but not for everyone. We are a country where your chances in life still depend upon how wealthy your parents are, where you live or the colour of your skin, and you can see that in the education data that hits my desk every day.</para>
<para>In this job, as I have done every day for two years and continue to do as long as I've got the privilege of being the education minister, I work to try to make sure that we build a better and fairer education system, particularly for people who live in the member for Fowler's electorate and mine—we're next-door neighbours—and in electorates like Spence. I work on how we can make our early education system better and fairer, and we have a Productivity Commission report that's about to arrive here to help inform that discussion. I work on how we can make our school education system better and fairer, properly fund our schools and make sure funding goes to the kids who need it the most. Those negotiations are happening with the states at the moment as well. And I work on how we build a better and fairer higher education system too.</para>
<para>That was very much the focus of the education portion of this year's budget, the first stage of our response to the Universities Accord. In that response we said that we are going to set ourselves a target that, as a nation, by 2050 we'll have 80 per cent of our workforce with a tertiary qualification. That's 80 per cent of the workforce—everyone from 15 to 65—who have either a TAFE qualification or a university degree. To put that in perspective, it's about 60 per cent now, so we are moving from a workforce 60 per cent of whom have post-school qualifications to a workforce where that figure is 80 per cent. To do that, the advice from the accord team is that we really have to make sure that more young people from our outer suburbs and our regions and from disadvantaged backgrounds like those in the electorates that we represent get a crack at going to TAFE or university and succeed when they get there. That, at its core, is what the accord is about and what our response in the budget this year is about.</para>
<para>HECS is a big part of it—reducing the cost of HECS. It reduces the total HECS debt by about $3 billion for more than three million Australians. For the average Aussie with a HECS debt of about 26 grand, it will reduce their HECS debt by about $1,200. I think the member for Bradfield asked: why hasn't this taken place already? Legislation will be introduced in the next few months. It will be backdated to take effect from the middle of last year, so it will wipe out those debts when that legislation is passed, as I'm sure it will be.</para>
<para>A number of members asked me questions about paid prac—about providing financial support, for the first time, for nursing students, teaching students and social work students. Why them? That's where the accord said that we should focus first. Will it help attract more people to the courses? I hope so, because that financial support is a real incentive. Will it help more people to finish the course? That's what the accord team tells us should happen, because at the moment some people are delaying finishing their courses because they can't afford to do the prac because they would have to give up their part-time job.</para>
<para>There are other things in the budget, around fee free courses and uncapping places for them to give people a springboard from school to university. We think that that will potentially double the number of people doing those free university preparation courses over the next 15 years. Again, that'll help a lot more people that currently don't get a crack at university to get a crack.</para>
<para>There will be outer suburban university hubs. We have them in the regions now. For the first time, we're going to put them in the suburbs. The member for Spence asked me about those. Applications for those 14 hubs are open now. They close at the end of July. I'd encourage all members listening or staff looking at the transcripts to talk to their universities, TAFEs and councils and encourage them to put applications in for those, because I think they play a key role in helping people who otherwise would think that uni's not for them—that it's for someone else somewhere else—to do university closer to home.</para>
<para>Finally, the member for Bradfield asked about antisemitism in our universities. I'm not sure whether it's possible to get a small extension of time here to make some important points. There is a place for peaceful protest in this country, but there is no place for hate, there is no place for intolerance, there is no place for intimidation and there is certainly no place for the poison of antisemitism or any type of racism, whether it exists in our universities or anywhere else in this country. In the lifetime of our grandparents, we have all seen the evil that antisemitism leads to. At the moment, a lot of Jewish students feel unwelcome at university. More than that, they are being made to feel unwelcome at university. That's what they have told me. That's what they have made clear to me. In turn, I have made it clear to universities that there is nothing more important than the safety of their students or the safety of their staff at campus.</para>
<para>Universities have codes of conduct, and it is important that they are enforced. That includes the power to cancel an academic award conferred by the university or suspend or expel students who breach these codes. Universities are taking disciplinary action, and we're also now seeing universities take action to wind up encampments on their grounds. There is also a role here for the federal regulator of universities. That is TEQSA. They have written to all universities outlining their responsibilities and have stood up a regulatory response team to proactively monitor the actions that universities take.</para>
<para>Finally, on the issue of hate speech and how it relates to universities, the Attorney-General has indicated his intention to bring forward legislation to create new criminal offences and strengthen existing laws against hate speech. The Universities Accord, which recommended changes to HECS, to paid prac, to fee-free courses and to outer-suburban university study hubs, also recommended a review or a study of racism in our universities and its impact on staff and students. So in the budget we've agreed to do that. We've announced a study into antisemitism, Islamophobia, racism and the experience of Indigenous people at our universities. That work will be led by the Race Discrimination Commissioner. Just like the work that Kate Jenkins, the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, did, the work that exposed the sexual violence occurring in our universities and led to the decision of government to establish a national student ombudsman, I'm confident that this work will help to make our universities safer places for all students and staff.</para>
<para>Proposed expenditure agreed to.</para>
<para>Federation Chamber adjourned at 19:37</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
  </fedchamb.xscript>
</hansard>