﻿
<hansard noNamespaceSchemaLocation="../../hansard.xsd" version="2.2">
  <session.header>
    <date>2024-08-21</date>
    <parliament.no>2</parliament.no>
    <session.no>1</session.no>
    <period.no>0</period.no>
    <chamber>House of Reps</chamber>
    <page.no>0</page.no>
    <proof>1</proof>
  </session.header>
  <chamber.xscript>
    <business.start>
      <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:WX="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
        <p class="HPS-SODJobDate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-SODJobDate">
            <span style="font-weight:bold;" />
            <a href="Chamber" type="">Wednesday, 21 August 2024</a>
          </span>
        </p>
        <p class="HPS-Normal" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-Normal">
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">The SPEAKER (</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">Hon.</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">
            </span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">Milton Dick</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">) </span>took the chair at 09:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.</span>
        </p>
      </body>
    </business.start>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENTS ON SIGNIFICANT MATTERS</title>
        <page.no>1</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENTS ON SIGNIFICANT MATTERS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence</title>
          <page.no>1</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Reference to Federation Chamber</title>
            <page.no>4</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs ELLIOT</name>
    <name.id>DZW</name.id>
    <electorate>Richmond</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<para>That further statements on ending gender-based violence be permitted in the Federation Chamber.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>COMMITTEES</title>
        <page.no>4</page.no>
        <type>COMMITTEES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Selection Committee</title>
          <page.no>4</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report</title>
            <page.no>4</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present report No. 30 of the Selection Committee relating to the consideration of committee and delegation business and private members' business on Monday 9 September 2024. The report will be printed in the <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline> for today and the committee's determination will appear on tomorrow's <inline font-style="italic">Notice Paper</inline>. Copies of the report have been placed on the table.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The report read as follows—</inline></para>
<quote><para class="block">Report relating to the consideration of committee and delegation business and of private Members' business</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">1. The Committee met in private session on Tuesday, 20 August 2024.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">2. The Committee deliberated on items of committee and delegation business that had been notified, private Members' business items listed on the Notice Paper and notices lodged on Tuesday, 20 August 2024, and determined the order of precedence and times on Monday, 9 September 2024, as follows:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Items for House of Representatives Chamber (10.10 am to 12 noon)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">COMMITTEE AND DELEGATION BUSINESS</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">PRIVATE MEMBERS ' BUSINESS</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Notices</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">1 DR M RYAN: To move:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) acknowledges that the tenor of political debate undertaken within this place has deteriorated from the standards expected by the Australian people;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) recognises that this place has a responsibility to elevate the national political debate to enhance and encourage social cohesion within Australian communities;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) commits to the eradication of the exploitation of race and ethnicity as a political tool within this place; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) agrees to eliminate the use of language corrosive of national unity and cohesion.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 20 August 2024.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">20 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Dr M Ryan</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 4 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">2 MS J RYAN: To move:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) acknowledges that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) 26 September 2024 marks 30 years since the Australian Labor Party adopted affirmative action quotas for female candidates in held and winnable seats.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the Federal Parliamentary Labor Party has met every quota and target set since its adoption ahead of schedule, including:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) 35 per cent by 2002 set in 1994;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) 40 per cent by 2012 set in 2002; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iii) 50 per cent by 2025 set in 2015;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) notes the Government is the first Commonwealth Government to have a majority of female members, which amongst other accomplishments, has led to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) expanded paid parental leave; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) wage increases for feminised sectors;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) on this significant anniversary, pays tribute to the pioneering women who led the fight for this significant change that has placed women at the centre of decision making; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) recommits to the fact that a woman's place is in the House and the Senate.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 19 August 2024.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">45 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Ms J Ryan</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 9 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">3 MR VAN MANEN: To move:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that productivity growth is a key contributor to increases in Australia's economic welfare and prosperity;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) acknowledges that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) according to the June 2024 National Accounts, productivity has fallen 5.2 per cent since the Government came to office;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the Government's continued failure on industrial relations legislation and poor economic management have caused businesses to rethink expansion and investment efforts;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) decline in business investment and dynamism has slowed the rate of innovation and technology adoption by firms, which in turn has slowed the nation's ability to increase productivity; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) Reserve Bank Governor, Michele Bullock's recent comments that 'the only way interest rates can be reduced is an improvement in our appalling productivity' demonstrate that our current cost-of-living crisis is being impacted by our declining rate of productivity; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) calls on the Government to support research and development efforts in the business sector and to remove burdensome red tape, which is slowing business growth and innovation, in an effort to increase Australia's productivity.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 13 August 2024.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">remaining private Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">'</inline> <inline font-style="italic"> business time prior to 12 noon.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Mr van Manen</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 9 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Items for Federation Chamber (11 am to 1.30 pm)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">PRIVATE MEMBERS ' BUSINESS</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Notices</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">1 MR BATES: To move:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) for decades, mining companies have been making excessive profits that should have been taxed in order to put dental and mental health into Medicare, build affordable homes and fund the rapid transition away from coal and gas; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) in Queensland, big mining companies have exported $634 billion of our resources but only paid nine per cent of that in royalties over the past ten years; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) calls on the Government to rein in the excessive profits of mining corporations.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 20 August 2024.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">20 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Mr Bates</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 4 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">2 DR ANANDA-RAJAH: To move:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That this House congratulates the efforts of the athletes, coaches, and support staff of the Australian Paralympic Team at the 2024 Paris Paralympic Games.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 19 August 2024.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">30 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Dr Ananda-Rajah</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 6 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">3 MR L O'BRIEN: To move:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) analysis of Australian Road Assessment Program data by the Royal Automobile Club of Queensland (RACQ) has found that motorists travelling on the national highway between Gympie and Cairns are five times more likely to be injured or killed in a crash than people driving on the national highway between Sydney and Melbourne;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the RACQ has found that 1,398 kilometres of the national highway between Gympie and Cairns is undivided and much of this section is rated just two stars out of five for safety;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the Government's funding cut to upgrades of the national highway from 80 per cent to 50 per cent of project costs will:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) delay or cease future upgrades to the national highway;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) put motorists' lives at risk;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iii) leave communities disconnected when the national highway floods; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iv) constrain economic growth and regional development by failing to properly fund upgrades to increase the capacity of the national highway and make it more efficient; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) calls on the Government to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) restore the former Government's 80 per cent funding share of projects to upgrade the national highway to expedite projects that will make it safer, increase capacity, and make it less prone to flooding; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) work with the Queensland Government to prioritise and fast track projects to make the national highway from Gympie to Cairns as safe as it is between Sydney and Melbourne.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 15 August 2024.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">25 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Mr L O</inline> <inline font-style="italic">'</inline> <inline font-style="italic">Brien</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 5 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">4 MS STANLEY: To move:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the Government's workplace relations policies are getting wages moving again, with annual real wages growing for the past three consecutive quarters;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) nominal real wages grew 4.1 per cent in the year to the June quarter 2024;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) annual real wages grew 0.3 per cent through the year to the June quarter 2024; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) this result comes off the back of inheriting a real wage decline of 3.4 per cent at the time of the election; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) recognises the Government is laying strong foundations for a better future for Australian workers, their families and communities, by:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) advocating for the wages of Australia's low paid in three consecutive submissions to the Annual Wage Review that the real wages of low paid workers not go backwards;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) supporting pay rises for aged care workers of up to 28 per cent through submissions to the Fair Work Commission's Aged Care Work Value Case;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) having a 15 per cent pay rise for early childhood education and care workers;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) getting almost half a million more workers covered by current enterprise agreements, boosting wages and conditions; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) making gender equality an object of the Fair Work Act and narrowing the gender pay gap to 12 per cent, the lowest level on record.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 19 August 2024.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">40 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Ms Stanley</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 8 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">5 MR COULTON: To move:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) acknowledges that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) Royal Far West (RFW) is a national charity dedicated to the health and wellbeing of Australia's country children across more than 200 schools and 364 communities; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) RFW is celebrating its centenary of service to Australia in 2024;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) in 2019, RFW received funding from the Department of Health and Aged Care to provide services online to schools and preschools under the National Paediatric Telecare Service (NPTS), and that funding finishes in June next year;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) workforce shortages in regional areas, and a resulting lack of access to services, has seen high demand for NPTS;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the NPTS overcomes the tyranny of distance and reduces expenses for families in the midst of a cost of living crisis; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) operating across four states, the NPTS has provided support to 20,000 children, parents and educators; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) urges the Government to provide ongoing funding to RFW to allow this vital allied health and mental health service to continue to support families in rural, regional and remote Australia.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 20 August 2024.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">remaining private Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">'</inline> <inline font-style="italic"> business time prior to 1.30 pm.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Mr Coulton</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 7 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Items for Federation Chamber (4.45 pm to 7.30 pm)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">PRIVATE MEMBERS ' BUSINESS</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Orders of the day</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">1 SMALL BUSINESSES: Resumption of debate (<inline font-style="italic">from 19 August 2024</inline>) on the motion of Mr Violi—That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) acknowledges that Australian small businesses are at breaking point and are being failed by the Government; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) under this Government, a record number of Australian businesses have become insolvent in the most recent financial year, including:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) 4,635 businesses in New South Wales;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) 2,863 businesses in Victoria;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iii) 2,036 businesses in Queensland;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iv) 733 businesses in Western Australia;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(v) 194 businesses in the Australian Capital Territory;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(vi) 94 businesses in Tasmania; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(vii) 43 businesses in the Northern Territory;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) this Government is now the worst government for Australian business on record, having surpassed the 10,757 businesses collapsing under the Government of 2011-12; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) Australian small businesses could survive a once-in-a-century pandemic but cannot survive the disastrous policies of this Government.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">30 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">All Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 6 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Notices — continued</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">6 MS MASCARENHAS: To move:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) acknowledges the data released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics showing the national gender pay gap is the lowest on record, falling to 11.5 per cent from 12 per cent in November 2023, and 14.1 per cent in May 2022;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) recognises the progress of the Government in advancing the economic empowerment of Australian women, noting the following initiatives:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) a $173.80 per week increase to women's average weekly earnings since May 2022;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) funding a 15 per cent wage increase for early childhood education and care workers;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) reaching a 63.2 per cent record high for women's workforce participation;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) a tax cut for every Australian woman taxpayer from July 1, and a bigger tax cut for 90 per cent of Australian women taxpayers;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) $1.1 billion over four years to pay superannuation on Government-funded paid parental leave from 1 July 2025;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(f) $427.4 million over four years to provide financial support to students on mandatory nursing (including midwifery), social work and teaching placements;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(g) expansion of paid parental leave, providing families with access to 26 weeks of leave by July 2026;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(h) $38.2 million over eight years to support a thriving, skilled and diverse science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) workforce in response to the Pathway to Diversity in STEM Review; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) $55.6 million over four years to establish the Building Women's Careers program;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) supports the Government as it continues to develop policies and invest in programs to improve women's economic empowerment, recognising the connection between the safety of women and women's financial autonomy and wellbeing; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) commends the Government's commitment to putting women at the centre of Australia's economic plan to make the lives of Australian women safer, fairer and more equal.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 20 August 2024.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">40 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Ms Mascarenhas</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 8 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">7 MR PASIN: To move:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the death of the late Steele Hall on 10 June 2024, aged 95 years;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) that Steele Hall is the only Australian to have served as Premier of a state, as well as a Member of three houses of parliament; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) that Steele Hall served as the 36th Premier of South Australia from 1968 to 1970, also served in the Commonwealth Parliament as a Senator for South Australia from 1974 to 1977, and was the federal Member for the electoral division of Boothby from 1981 to 1996; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) acknowledges the service of Steele Hall across four decades and three houses of parliament to the Australian and South Australian people.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 15 August 2024.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">30 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Mr Pasin</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 6 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">8 MR R MITCHELL: To move:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) 1 to 7 September 2024 marks Men's Shed Week led by the Australian Men's Shed Association, with this year's theme, 'Send him down to the Shed'; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the theme acknowledges that most men are introduced to a Men's Shed by someone else, and reconnects men with community;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) recognises:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the essential service the Men's Sheds provide nationally as one of Australia's largest community development organisations with around 1,300 Men's Sheds across Australia and over 50,000 Australians participating in Men's Sheds; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) that participation in Men's Sheds leads to improved mental health outcomes, with participants reporting increased self-esteem, awareness and destigmatisation of mental health, and fosters community spirit and mateship which are key to the foundations of our nation; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) reiterates:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the Government's ongoing support for the Australian Men's Shed Association and commitment in the 2024-25 budget to provide $6 million over two years to support Men's Sheds; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) that this provides funding for health and wellbeing events, shed improvements, tools and equipment and automated external defibrillators.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 20 August 2024.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">45 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Mr R Mitchell</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 9 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">9 MR WALLACE: To move:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) on 6 February 2023, United Nations independent experts identified that approximately one million Tibetan children were being affected by Chinese government policies aimed at assimilating Tibetan people culturally, religiously and linguistically through a residential school system;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) on 14 December 2023, the European Union Parliament adopted a resolution on the abduction of Tibetan children and forced assimilation practices through Chinese boarding schools in Tibet;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) on 10 June 2024, the Canadian House of Commons unanimously passed a resolution in support of Tibet and the Tibetan people; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) on 12 June 2024, the United States Congress passed the 'Promoting a Resolution to Tibet-China Act';</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) stands in solidarity with the people of Tibet;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) recognises Australia is deeply concerned about reports detailing China's assimilationist policies, including:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) forced labour transfer programs and the coerced separation of Tibetan children from their families through state-run boarding schools;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the detention of Tibetans for peaceful expression of political views;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the suppression of Tibetan religious expression; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) the use of excessive security measures against Tibetans;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) reiterates that the Tibetan people are entitled to their fundamental human rights and freedoms, including their right to self-determination;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) further recognises that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) Tibetans should be empowered to freely choose their economic, social, cultural, and religious policies without interference; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) religious and spiritual communities should be empowered to choose their own religious and spiritual leaders without government interference, and this should include the eventual successor of His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) calls on:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the Chinese Government to reengage with the representatives of the 14th Dalai Lama to establish genuine autonomy for Tibetans within China, and urges the Chinese authorities to release the Panchen Lama; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) China to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) repeal legislation and cease practices which discriminate against Tibetans on the basis of race or religion;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) cease arbitrary detention, coercive labour transfer, and family separation programs;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iii) end restrictions on movement and on the rights of Tibetans to enjoy their own culture and language; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iv) allow meaningful and unfettered access to Tibet for independent human rights observers; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(7) further notes successive Australian Governments have and should continue to raise the issue of human rights violations in China, through political dialogues with the Chinese authorities at the highest levels.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 2 July 2024.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline> <inline font-style="italic">remaining private Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">'</inline> <inline font-style="italic"> business time prior to 7.30 pm.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Mr Wallace</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 4 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">THE HON D. M. DICK MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Speaker of the House of Representatives</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">21 August 2024</para></quote>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>10</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Better and Fairer Schools (Information Management) Bill 2024</title>
          <page.no>10</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="r7232" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Better and Fairer Schools (Information Management) Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Reference to Federation Chamber</title>
            <page.no>10</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RYAN</name>
    <name.id>249224</name.id>
    <electorate>Lalor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I declare that, unless otherwise ordered, the Better and Fairer Schools (Information Management) Bill 2024 stands referred to the Federation Chamber for further consideration at the adjournment of the debate on the motion for the second reading of the bill.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Administrative Review Tribunal (Miscellaneous Measures) Bill 2024</title>
          <page.no>10</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="r7237" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Administrative Review Tribunal (Miscellaneous Measures) Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>First Reading</title>
            <page.no>10</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>10</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a second time.</para></quote>
<para>The Administrative Review Tribunal (Miscellaneous Measures) Bill 2024 supports the establishment of the new Administrative Review Tribunal, created by the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024(ART Act).</para>
<para>The ART Act received royal assent on 3 June 2024 and will commence on 14 October 2024. Two additional acts, containing consequential and transitional amendments to 248 Commonwealth acts<inline font-style="italic">, </inline>have also received royal assent. The ART legislative package gives effect to the government's commitment to a establish a new federal administrative review body that is user-focused, efficient, accessible, independent and fair.</para>
<para>This bill completes the establishment of the tribunal and ensures that existing legislation interacts effectively with it. These amendments, which are largely procedural and technical, will amend 52 Commonwealth acts (including the ART Act).</para>
<para>The bill is necessary and could only be introduced following the passage of the ART Act due to the volume and complexity of interactions between the ART Act and other pieces of Commonwealth legislation—particularly those already before the parliament when the ART package was introduced.</para>
<para>The bill makes a number of minor changes to the ART Act to improve user experience and ensure the act's intended operation is clear.</para>
<para>For example, the bill amends the ART Act to exclude the period between 24 December and 14 January from the calculation of the 28-day period from which a party can appeal a decision of the tribunal to the Federal Court of Australia. This addresses practical difficulties and disadvantages to parties seeking to make an appeal over the holiday period and aligns with existing practice within the federal courts.</para>
<para>The bill also clarifies that, where an applicant is no longer able to continue with an application for review of a decision for reasons such as death, bankruptcy or liquidation, another person may only apply to continue the proceeding if they would have been able to apply for review of the substantive decision.</para>
<para>The bill includes amendments to ensure that decisions of the National Archives of Australia relating to access to certain national security records are reviewed in the tribunal's Intelligence and Security jurisdictional area. This ensures that the amendments in the Intelligence Services Legislation Amendment Bill 2023 are reflected in the new tribunal.</para>
<para>Amendments to other legislation</para>
<para>In addition to these amendments to the ART Act, the bill makes minor amendments to other laws to support the effective operation of the tribunal, consistent with the overarching objective of harmonising the federal system of administrative review.</para>
<para>These include: removing specific provisions of other legislation providing 28-day timeframes to apply to the tribunal for review of decisions that have been deemed to be made under the terms of those acts; amendments to legislation in the Social Services portfolio to remove the three-month time limit to apply for both internal and tribunal review of ABSTUDY or Assistance for Isolated Children Scheme debt decisions; ensuring that, once an application has been referred to the guidance and appeals panel, the decision under review cannot be varied or substituted without the tribunal's visibility; amendments to the Migration Act 1958to clarify that an application is not valid and therefore does not enliven the tribunal's jurisdiction unless it is properly made, which does not change existing requirements but ensures that applicants can easily identify, on the face of the legislation, what they are required to do to make a valid application; and amendments to the Crimes Act 1914to provide tribunal members nominated to issue post-entry and delayed notification search warrants with the same immunity and protections as tribunal members who are nominated to exercise other similar functions under the Crimes Act.</para>
<para>Conclusion</para>
<para>This bill completes the package of reforms that establishes the new Administrative Review Tribunal and reflects the ongoing commitment of this government to reforming Australia's system of administrative review. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Parliamentary Workplace Support Service Amendment (Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission) 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="r7236" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Parliamentary Workplace Support Service Amendment (Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission) Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>First Reading</title>
            <page.no>11</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>12</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GORMAN</name>
    <name.id>74519</name.id>
    <electorate>Perth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a second time.</para></quote>
<para>The purpose of the Parliamentary Workplace Support Service Amendment (Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission) Bill is to establish the Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission.</para>
<para>Establishing the IPSC was one of the recommendations made by the Australian Human Rights Commission in its November 2021 report—<inline font-style="italic">Independent Review into Commonwealth Parliamentary workplaces</inline>—also known as the Set the Standard report.</para>
<para>That report set out a framework for action to ensure that Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces are safe and respectful.</para>
<para>In doing so, it observed that these workplaces should uphold the standing of the parliament as a worthy reflection of the community it serves.</para>
<para>That observation is incontestable.</para>
<para>It is why—on the first sitting day of 2022—a joint statement of acknowledgment was delivered on behalf of the cross-party Parliamentary Leadership Taskforce. The statement declared that this parliament should serve as a model workplace for our nation.</para>
<para>And it is why—in progressive updates on implementation of the Set the Standard report—this place has acknowledged the mistakes of the past and committed to build safe and respectful workplaces.</para>
<para>The Parliamentary Leadership Taskforce—chaired by Dr Vivienne Thom AM—has been working to steer implementation of the Set the Standard report's framework for action. Much has already been achieved. There have been real and important improvements to the culture of this place.</para>
<para>Last year the government, working with the PLT and its Staff Consultation Group, progressed legislation to establish the Parliamentary Workplace Support Service.</para>
<para>The PWSS—as it is known—commenced its enhanced operations as a statutory agency on 1 October 2023. It provides centralised human resources support to parliamentarians and their staff.</para>
<para>The PWSS also provides services to a broader cohort of people who work in the parliament to support a safe and respectful workplace. These are its confidential support service and a complaint resolution service.</para>
<para>The PWSS also has an interim function to undertake workplace investigations. This 'review' function will sunset on 1 October 2025. It is intended that the PWSS review function would be replaced by the Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission which would be established by this bill.</para>
<para>Following the PWSS's successful commencement last year, the government turned our attention to progressing the IPSC. These represent two significant structural reforms to our workplace. As such, we considered their progression in a staged and orderly way would best integrate these entities into our workplaces.</para>
<para>Subject to passage of the legislation, our aim is that the IPSC would commence on 1 October this year.</para>
<para>The IPSC's commencement will mean that the separate Behaviour Codes for Parliamentarians and their staff—and the Behaviour Standards for the Commonwealth Parliamentary Workplaces—can be finally adopted.</para>
<para>These codes were developed by the Joint Select Committee on Parliamentary Standards. They were endorsed by both houses of parliament in February last year pending the establishment of the IPSC to enforce them.</para>
<para>Together, the behaviour codes and the IPSC are about accountability.</para>
<para>The Set the Standard report said that the absence of clear standards of conduct, and the absence of consequences for misconduct, make the Australian parliament not only out of step with developments in other parliamentary contexts but also with the most basic standards in other Australian workplaces.</para>
<para>Consistent with the report, the bill would establish the IPSC as a fair and independent workplace investigation framework. Its role is to be an impartial fact finder.</para>
<para>The IPSC commissioners would perform their functions in an independent and impartial way.</para>
<para>Where expected standards of conduct have not been upheld, the IPSC will be able to impose or recommend sanctions set out in the bill, or make a referral for further action in the case of parliamentarians.</para>
<para>If the IPSC finds that a parliamentarian has seriously breached the conduct requirements, there will be a role for the houses of parliament. The IPSC would refer its findings to the Privileges Committee which would then consider the appropriate sanction and report to the relevant house of the parliament with its recommendation.</para>
<para>It is appropriate that the houses of parliament make such decisions about disciplining their members.</para>
<para>There is accountability through this mechanism, and a recommendation by a Privileges Committee will become public.</para>
<para>The structure of an IPSC investigation process in the bill aligns with the Set the Standard report. Recognising parliamentarians are elected members of the parliament, three commissioners would decide a final report for a parliamentarian respondent. A single commissioner would make that decision for a staff respondent or other worker. The bill also provides avenues for internal review of decisions. In all cases, a review panel would be constituted by three commissioners. Again, this aligns with the Set the Standard report.</para>
<para>Under the bill, the IPSC would be established as part of the PWSS. While its investigation function will be separated from the PWSS's support and complaint resolution roles, the IPSC would still need to work in a complementary way with the PWSS.</para>
<para>It is not intended that the IPSC would investigate a complaint that would be better addressed through the PWSS functions.</para>
<para>People who have a workplace issue would be encouraged to contact the PWSS's confidential support service. This should be the front door for help and advice as envisaged by the <inline font-style="italic">Set the </inline><inline font-style="italic">s</inline><inline font-style="italic">tandard</inline> report.</para>
<para>The PWSS will be able to provide advice on ways to resolve a complaint. It can also provide wellbeing support. This is a confidential service and available to potential complainants, respondents or others who are involved.</para>
<para>If an IPSC workplace investigation would be appropriate, the PWSS could assist a person to make a complaint to the IPSC.</para>
<para>The bill is the product of extensive consultations with members of the Parliamentary Leadership Taskforce and the Parliamentary Leadership Taskforce staff consultation group. I thank all involved in getting us to this point. Lots of thoughtful and constructive feedback was received.</para>
<para>Ranges of views were put forward on various points, and some balancing has been required.</para>
<para>A particular point to emphasise is that it is not the intention of the bill to change existing work health and safety laws.</para>
<para>Nothing in the bill requires people who have duties under work health and safety laws to make reports to the IPSC. The IPSC complements existing work health and safety laws.</para>
<para>Importantly, employers in Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces already have obligations and duties under work health and safety laws. The IPSC provides an additional pathway to take action, where appropriate.</para>
<para>Because of many variabilities that can arise, if unsure of what to do to meet a WHS duty, parliamentarians and their staff could obtain advice from the PWSS, as they can now. As part of this function, the PWSS can assist with advice on a referral for an IPSC workplace investigation if it is an appropriate action.</para>
<para>The establishment of the IPSC, and the adoption of the behaviour codes, will be a significant change in our workplace. The PWSS also has a function to provide guidance on the behaviour codes. It will roll out education on the codes so that people are aware of their obligations when the codes commence.</para>
<para>Consistent with recommendation 2 of the Joint Select Committee on Parliamentary Standards report, shortly after the IPSC has commenced, it is intended that the behaviour code for parliamentarians and the behaviour standards for Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces would be adopted into the standing orders of each House of the parliament.</para>
<para>As indicated in the bill, it is proposed the behaviour code for parliamentarians' staff would be formalised via a determination under the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984to coincide with commencement of the other codes.</para>
<para>However, we know standards in this place are not to set and forget. The legislation also sets out that the newly established Parliamentary Joint Committee on Parliamentary Standards would commence a review of the behaviour codes within one year of the first session of each new parliament, once the IPSC has commenced.</para>
<para>As has been said before, the parliament is a unique workplace, but it is also one of Australia's most prominent workplaces. It should set the standard.</para>
<para>Through the <inline font-style="italic">Set the </inline><inline font-style="italic">s</inline><inline font-style="italic">tandard </inline>report, we heard from so many people who have worked, and continue to work in this place. As a government we have worked steadily and thoroughly to support implementation of the recommendations of the report.</para>
<para>This bill provides further accountability. This bill will enable enforcement of behaviours codes and standards to improve safety and wellbeing across Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces, which is a goal we all share.</para>
<para>That is why I commend this bill to the House.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Health Amendment (Technical Changes to Averaging Price Disclosure Threshold and Other Matters) Bill 2024</title>
          <page.no>14</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="r7235" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">National Health Amendment (Technical Changes to Averaging Price Disclosure Threshold and Other Matters) Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>First Reading</title>
            <page.no>14</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>14</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms KEARNEY</name>
    <name.id>LTU</name.id>
    <electorate>Cooper</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a second time.</para></quote>
<para>The National Health Amendment (Technical Changes to Averaging Price Disclosure Threshold and Other Matters) Bill 2024amends the National Health Act 1953 to clarify the operation of provisions relating to pricing and supply arrangements for older and low-cost medicines.</para>
<para>Under the National Health Act 1953, price reductions can occur for multi-branded medicines listed on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme—these are known as price disclosure price reductions. These price reductions ensure that the subsidy paid by the Commonwealth under the PBS for a particular medicine more closely reflects the price actually paid in the market for a medicine by a pharmacist.</para>
<para>This results in price reductions to some medicines on the PBS on 1 April and 1 October of each year. These reductions are based on data submitted to the department by medicines companies about their sales volume and revenue. A price reduction can occur where the difference between the PBS price and the average market price that the medicine is being sold at meets thresholds in section 99ADH of the act.</para>
<para>Amendments under the bill clarify provisions that were introduced through the National Health Amendment (Enhancing the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme) Act 2021 that implemented reforms negotiated with the medicines industry through strategic agreements to improve access to medicines for Australian patients.</para>
<para>The amendment act included new provisions to support supply of the medicines that Australians need and use every day. This was achieved through the 'Medicines Supply Security Guarantee' which included reforms to improve the supply of older, lower cost multi-branded medicines referred to in the act as 'designated brands'.</para>
<para>This bill will make technical amendments only, which are intended for avoidance of doubt and therefore are not intended to change the operation of the provisions in the amendment act which have been in effect since 1 July 2022.</para>
<para>The bill includes amendments that apply retrospectively and prospectively to ensure the understanding of the provisions is consistent with the parliament's intention when it passed the amendment act, removing any possible doubt as to how these provisions have operated to date, and how they will continue to operate. The amendments clarify provisions in section 99ADH of the act which relate to the 12.5 per cent average unadjusted price reduction test, and section 99ADHC of the act which relates to the timing of when a brand becomes a designated brand.</para>
<para>The amendments to section 99ADH of the National Health Act 1953 reflect the policy intent outlined in the explanatory memorandum for the 2021 act, which states in relation to designated brands with an approved ex-manufacturer price greater than $4:</para>
<quote><para class="block">…there will be no further price reductions under the Act unless, over a period of three consecutive data collection periods (1.5 years), the brand is discounted on average by 12.5% or more without taking a price reduction, or if the brand is discounted by more than 30% in any one price disclosure cycle.</para></quote>
<para>The amendments clarify paragraph 99ADH(6)(b), that, for a brand to pass the 12.5 per cent average unadjusted price reduction test, a price reduction cannot have occurred as a result of calculations using data from the three consecutive data collection periods used in the test.</para>
<para>Each data collection period is six months in duration; therefore three consecutive data collection periods result in a period of 1.5 years between a possible price reduction for designated brands that have discounted on average by 12.5 per cent or more in those periods.</para>
<para>Section 99ADHC of the National Health Act 1953 sets out the conditions for a brand to be a designated brand and subject to a range of more protective pricing and supply provisions. These provisions include price disclosure thresholds, floor price protections, and the minister's powers under division 3CA if a medicine company offers a discount or incentive in relation to sales of a designated brand with an AEMP of $4 or less. Designated brands are also subject to the minimum stockholding requirements under division 3CAA. As outlined in the explanatory memorandum for the amendment act in relation to designated brands:</para>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Where a PBS listed brand is protected by the price reduction floor, it will be subject to a condition that minimum stocks of the brand are held in Australia</inline></para></quote>
<para>As there are various consequences that flow from a brand of pharmaceutical item being identified as a 'designated brand', it is necessary to clarify the timing on when a brand becomes a designated brand. The bill provides a definition of 'previous data collection period' to make clear which data collection period the 'previous data collection period' refers to, which is required to determine whether or not a brand is a designated brand. This in turn ensures it's clear that each of the operative provisions associated with a designated brand are effective from the same date on which a brand becomes a designated brand.</para>
<para>The bill includes provisions that are retrospective, commencing from 1 July 2022, in the interests of providing certainty to the various medicine supply chain stakeholders due to the inherent complexity associated with the PBS statutory framework. Although the amendments do not change the intended meaning of the provisions, they are made for the avoidance of doubt to avoid potential ambiguity. Therefore, retrospectivity and validation remove any potential doubts regarding past price reductions subsequent to which subsidies have already been paid to approved suppliers by reference to reduced approved ex-manufacturer prices.</para>
<para>In conclusion, this bill includes technical amendments only that will provide clarity regarding the operation of sections 99ADH and 99ADHC of the National Health Act 1953 that relate to designated brands. These amendments are consistent with the parliament's intention when it passed the amendment act and the overarching policy intent of the price disclosure regime.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>COMMITTEES</title>
        <page.no>15</page.no>
        <type>COMMITTEES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Treaties Joint Committee</title>
          <page.no>15</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report</title>
            <page.no>15</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CHESTERS</name>
    <name.id>249710</name.id>
    <electorate>Bendigo</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On behalf of the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties, I present the committee's report <inline font-style="italic">Report 219: Australia-Tuvalu Falepili Union; CITES; Scientific </inline><inline font-style="italic">balloons</inline></para>
<para>Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e).</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CHESTERS</name>
    <name.id>249710</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I'm pleased to make a statement on the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties's report <inline font-style="italic">Report 219: Australia-Tuvalu Falepili Union; CITES; Scientific balloons</inline>.</para>
<para>With respect to JSCOT report 219, contained in this report is the Australia-Tuvalu Falepili Union, which is a legally binding partnership between Australia and our Pacific Island partner.</para>
<para>The treaty enhances development, creates human mobility pathways, including a recommitment to the concept of mobility with dignity, and facilitates cooperation between the two nations.</para>
<para>The treaty focuses on matters relating to climate change and regional security.</para>
<para>The committee heard that climate change remains the single greatest threat to the livelihoods, security and wellbeing of Tuvaluans.</para>
<para>The treaty elevates Australia's existing relationship with Tuvalu.</para>
<para>The treaty also improves Australia's standing in the Pacific.</para>
<para>Also included in the report are amendments to appendices I, II and III of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.</para>
<para>CITES is a prominent multilateral environmental agreement that regulates the international trade in wild fauna and flora via the listing of more than 40,000 species of animals and plants in three appendices.</para>
<para>This listing is undertaken based on scientific assessment and analysis of international trade data.</para>
<para>The treaty action amends the species listed in the CITES appendices I, II and III. While most of the listing amendments have no implications for Australia, the listing of the pygmy blue-tongue lizard, four marine species and seven plant species does have some trade implications for Australia.</para>
<para>The committee welcomed the efforts of DCCEEW to keep it aware of the CITES treaty action; however, it notes that almost all the species listings in appendix II came into effect prior to the referral to the committee for consideration.</para>
<para>This prevented the committee from understanding the concerns of businesses impacted by the listings prior to the date of entry into force.</para>
<para>Finally, in the report is the Exchange of Notes to extend the Exchange of Notes constituting an agreement between the Government of Australia and the Government of the United States of America to Amend and Extend the Agreement concerning the Conduct of Scientific Balloon Flights for Civil Research Purposes.</para>
<para>This treaty is as oldschool as they get.</para>
<para>The treaty extends the mutually beneficial agreement between Australia and the United States.</para>
<para>Cooperation on space related activities between the two nations dates back to 1957.</para>
<para>The extension of the existing agreement allows the US to continue to use existing facilities in Woomera for the launching, tracking, recording and recovery of scientific balloons in Australian territory.</para>
<para>At the public hearing for the inquiry, the committee heard issues raised in relation to Australian sovereignty as well as a future broadening of the agreement.</para>
<para>The committee found that the agreement did not impose upon Australian sovereignty. There are no current plans to broaden the scope of the treaty; however, this is possible.</para>
<para>The committee supports all three major treaties considered in the report and recommends that binding treaty action be taken.</para>
<para>On behalf of the committee, I commend this report to the House.</para>
<para>I'd also like to take a moment on behalf of the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties to thank the former Chair of JSCOT, Hon. Mr Josh Wilson. His efforts contributed to ensuring that JSCOT was able to conduct inquiries into and report on a large number of treaty actions that are relevant to Australia's national interests. I am told it is the most active tabling committee that we have in our parliament. On behalf of JSCOT, I wish him well in his new role.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>MOTIONS</title>
        <page.no>16</page.no>
        <type>MOTIONS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East</title>
          <page.no>16</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHANDLER-MATHER</name>
    <name.id>300121</name.id>
    <electorate>Griffith</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Griffith moving the following motion—That the House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the recent opinion of the International Court of Justice that the State of Israel's occupation is illegal and that Israel is responsible for apartheid;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the widespread allegations of torture and sexual abuse against Palestinian prisoners in Israel's prisons and detention centres, including from the UN Human Rights Office and B'Tselem;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) statements from Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Likud Member of the Knesset Hanoch Milwidsky that support the legitimacy of the rape of Palestinian prisoners;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) the recent statement by Israel's Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich that the starving of 2 million Palestinians 'might be justified and moral';</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) Israel's systematic bombing of water and sewerage treatment facilities has reduced water supply in Gaza to about a quarter of what it was pre the war, and has contributed to the re-emergence of polio in Gaza, which causes paralysis and death in children; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(f) the continuing genocide and war crimes in Gaza including the widescale deaths and injuries caused by the State of Israel's bombings and other attacks; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) calls on the Government to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) sanction the State of Israel and members of the extremist Netanyahu Government, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) end two way arms trade with the State of Israel including the F35 parts manufactured in Australia and used in the State of Israel's fighter jets</para></quote>
<para>How many atrocities does Israel have to commit before this government will take action? How many children does it have to kill before it will place sanctions on the State of Israel?How many schools does Israel have to bomb before Labor will end two-way arms trade with Israel and stop the export of F-35 parts that are in Israeli jets currently committing atrocities in Gaza?</para>
<para>We know now that the official death toll in Gaza is over 40,000. Over 70 per cent of those are women and children. We hear these numbers a lot, but what we don't often do is think about the human consequences and stories behind these deaths and the horrific nature of them. As I read these out, I want people to think, when these atrocities are being committed at a deliberate and systematic scale—a genocide is being carried out in Gaza right now—why is it, then, that the Australian government and the Labor Party won't end two-way arms trade with Israel or, just like they sanctioned Russia, sanction the State of Israel?</para>
<para>Let's talk about Muhammed Bhar, one of the children killed by Israel. Muhammed Bhar had Down syndrome and autism. He was attacked by a combat dog when Israeli soldiers raided his family's home in Gaza. His mother said: 'Muhammed was pleading with the dog while it was attacking him. He said, "Enough, habibi, enough."' Habibi translates as 'my love'. The soldiers put Muhammed in another room and forced his family to leave their home without him. When they returned a few days later, he was dead.</para>
<para>Things like this are happening every day in Gaza right now. It's every day, at a systematic scale, and it has been admitted by Israeli ministers that this is their goal. What does this government do? Nothing. How many horrors have to occur? Is there a number that this government is looking at? Is there a number of kids that have to be murdered by the State of Israel before this government will take action?</para>
<para>Let's talk about another one. What about three-year-old Emad Abu al-Qura? He was killed outside his home when he went to buy fruit with his cousin. He was shot in the head by an Israeli sniper. Has cousin was also shot and killed. In fact, what we know is that, since October 7, 115 infants, newborn babies, have been born and then killed and 564 schools have been either partially damaged or destroyed as Israel has deliberately targeted them and bombed them.</para>
<para>What will it take? The gall of this government is that, whenever they face criticism about their complicity in this genocide going on in Gaza right now, they talk about social cohesion. You know, people have eyes. They see what's going on in Gaza. The reason that people are upset is that they see stories like this and then they look to their government to show some moral leadership, to show some international leadership. When they've seen this government take out over 1,000 autonomous sanctions against Russia for their illegal invasion of Ukraine, they then look and expect them to do something: 'Well, surely any government with any sense of morality, any sense of justice or any sense of humanity would turn around and do the same thing to the State of Israel and sanction the State of Israel.' But apparently not.</para>
<para>The reality is this—this is what we know: every time that the State of Israel commits an atrocity like that or carries out a bombing of a school or a hospital and then they look around the world to countries like Australia, who does nothing, Israel is emboldened to keep acting. We have a situation right now where polio has re-emerged in Gaza. Just think about the devastating impacts that will have on Gazan children. Do their lives not matter? There are a lot of Australians right now who think that they should be proud of this country. One way of being proud of this country is to have a government that says, 'No more,' when we see atrocities like this. We say, 'No more,' and we take action. Muhammed Bhar's last hours were spent scared and alone, bleeding and dying to death—as he couldn't even die in the arms of his family—and he is just one of the over 15,000 Palestinian children who have been murdered by Israel.</para>
<para>What is this about? Genuinely, why is it that the Australian government cannot take a single action against the State of Israel? Why is it that this Australian government, which has signed a $917 million defence contract with Elbit Systems—an Israeli weapons company that has been blacklisted by other countries around the world for war crimes committed with their weapons in the Occupied Palestinian Territories—can't even cancel that contract? Why is that they can't follow the Netherlands and ban the export of F-35 parts going into Israeli jets? Why is it that they can't take sanctions?</para>
<para>Is it, perhaps, their slavish loyalty to the United States? When will this country and its government learn, whether it be Labor or Liberal? By the way, the Liberal Party never reckoned with their disastrous invasion of Iraq. What is it? Iraq, Afghanistan—how many times do we have to follow slavishly into a war backed by the United States? Look at the consequences: the millions dead. The reality is that it makes the world less safe. Australia backed the US invasion of Afghanistan, apparently to get rid of the Taliban. What did we end up with, after 20 years, hundreds of billions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of deaths? The Taliban. They're still there. What happened when Australia backed the invasion of Iraq, which some estimates said led to a million dead? What did we end up with? ISIS. Good on you, guys! It worked out real well! Great stuff! There is a lack of seriousness and a lack of intellectual capacity on either side of this House to deal with the consequences of a foreign policy that this country backs and that leads to the deaths and suffering of millions of people. What will it take?</para>
<para>The message that a lot of people hear from this government—when you compare what's going on and the sanctions they've imposed against Russia and the sanctions that they refuse to impose against the State of Israel— is that somehow Palestinian lives matter less. You know what? That view is not representative of the people in the community, because people in the community and across Australia have a different view. They see when our country has a responsibility—a responsibility created by the fact that this country is engaged in a two-way arms trade with the State of Israel as it carries out a genocide, and a responsibility that says this is a country that's part of the international community. That responsibility warrants actions, and, where this government does not take actions, that creates a complicity in the actions that the State of Israel is carrying out. At the end of the day—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Leeser</name>
    <name.id>109556</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>What about the hostages?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Thompson</name>
    <name.id>281826</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Shut up.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHANDLER-MATHER</name>
    <name.id>300121</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'll take those objections, because of the lack of humanity in this House. What about Muhammed Bhar, who had autism and Down syndrome, left to die—not even with his family? Oh, great! You talk about the deaths on October 7, which the Greens have condemned and which are disgraceful, but that does not justify the deaths of 15,000 children. That does not justify the deaths of men, women and children. Unnecessary deaths can only create less— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is there a seconder for the motion?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BANDT</name>
    <name.id>M3C</name.id>
    <electorate>Melbourne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I second this motion. Action—that's what people want from their government. When we witness a genocide, starvation, destruction of people's lives, the re-emergence of polio and a court saying that the State of Israel is committing the crime of apartheid, people want their own government to take action. Enough of the hand-wringing words. Enough of the pleas and the supposed red lines that the extremist government of Benjamin Netanyahu then crosses every time without consequences. People want action.</para>
<para>There are things that this government could do to put pressure on the extremist government of Benjamin Netanyahu to stop the slaughter and the genocide, but Labor is refusing to do them. Governments were more than willing, with the support of everyone across the parliament, to put sanctions on Russia when it committed its illegal invasion. Since the parliament was here last time—when everyone else, certainly on the Labor side and on the Liberal side, voted against the recognition of Palestine, despite it being something that Labor said they would make a priority—we have had international courts say the crime of apartheid is being committed; we have seen ministers in the government say that the starvation of two million Palestinians might be justified and moral; and we have seen the re-emergence of polio. Not only are there the tens of thousands of deaths but we now have the re-emergence of polio. We are on the verge of epidemics that will see a whole generation of children being forced to live a life that we as humanity thought we had left behind us. They are now going to be facing diseases that we know are preventable but that we are now seeing reappear. Not only are we seeing that; we are seeing kids die because they can't get enough to eat or drink.</para>
<para>This is happening on a daily basis, and people want their governments to take action. We have been seeing voices right across the spectrum since we were last here. I want to pay tribute to those brave voices, including those brave and heroic voices from the Jewish community, who are saying this extremist Netanyahu government is committing war crimes. As they lend their voices not only to everyone across this parliament who is calling for the release of hostages but to those who are calling on this government to recognise that the extremist Netanyahu government has crossed lines time and time again, they are saying, like millions of people across this country, that it is the time for the government to take action.</para>
<para>It has been said that the words are too strong when the Greens say that Labor is complicit in genocide. Well, no, because these international treaties that we have signed up to require governments to stand up and take action when they see war crimes being committed. There is no supranational police force that is going to step in and stop governments like the extremist Netanyahu government from committing war crimes. These very treaties, like the treaty against committing genocide that Australia has signed up to, say that governments like this Labor government are required to take action when they see war crimes being committed by others, and there's a reason for that. It's because if Labor keeps letting Netanyahu's extremist government commit these war crimes then more and more will be committed. These treaties and conventions that we sign up to impose obligations on this government to take action when it sees war crimes being committed or when it sees the crime of apartheid being committed, and at the moment, when Labor does nothing, Labor is complicit. Labor is not meeting its legal or moral obligations under these treaties. It could also very simply say, as they have in the Netherlands, that it is wrong that Australian-made parts are being used in these F-35 fighter jets to drop bombs, and it won't even do that either.</para>
<para>So this is a chance for every member of parliament who voted against recognising Palestine before to come in now and vote to put some pressure to stop the genocide. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WALLACE</name>
    <name.id>265967</name.id>
    <electorate>Fisher</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak strongly against this motion. Where were the Greens on October 7? Where were the Greens when 1,200 innocent Israelis were killed? Have any members of the Greens been to Israel? Have they been to see the sights of the atrocities? Have they bothered to watch the 43-minute video? You don't have to go to Israel. Have you seen the 43-minute video? If you haven't, I encourage you to watch the 43-minute video.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I ask members to put their thoughts through the chair.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WALLACE</name>
    <name.id>265967</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Deputy Speaker, I encourage those members of the Greens to watch that 43-minute video, because it will enlighten them. I wish I hadn't seen it. I travelled to Israel in December, and in December I watched that video showing the absolute barbarity of those attacks—the absolute barbarity of Hamas, kitted up with rocket propelled grenades and automatic weapons. And do you know what else they had? They had cameras, because they wanted to show the world what they were doing. Not only did they kill innocent Israelis; they killed women and children, beheading people. There was rape. Where were the Greens? It's 'me too' unless you're a Jew. Rape was used as a weapon of war.</para>
<para>Yet the Greens come in here and say nothing about what caused this war in the first place. What caused this war was the atrocities on 7 October. If Hamas wanted this war to be over, they could unconditionally surrender and hand back the more than 100 hostages who are still being held. Six hostages were discovered overnight—dead, killed. There are around about 105 or 106 hostages who are still remaining. We don't know whether they're alive or dead.</para>
<para>The unbelievable hypocrisy of the members of the Greens to come in and make these political statements, which are designed to try and get the media involved, and report, 'Look at what the Greens are doing.' Let me tell you, Greens—through you, Chair—you were once a party of environmentalists. Those same environmentalists are walking away from you in their droves because the Greens have become much more than environmentalists. They've abandoned that, and now what they are doing is effectively trying to become the major party on the left. Please, God, that will never happen. It will be bad enough if they form some sort of a coalition with the Labor Party, but at least the Labor Party is a party of government. They don't just come in and make ridiculous comments. The Greens will never, hopefully, have to serve in government.</para>
<para>I want to encourage the members of the Greens, before they do this stunt again, to travel to Israel and see what I've seen, to at the very least watch that 43-minute video of the atrocities that have occurred, and then continuously come out and condemn Hamas, condemn the violence and call on Hamas to unconditionally surrender and return each and every single one of the hostages. If they did that, this war could end today. Why don't they do it? I don't understand, and I don't pretend to understand what their motivations or their rationales are but it is not coming from a bona fide place. This House should condemn the Greens today.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr THISTLETHWAITE</name>
    <name.id>182468</name.id>
    <electorate>Kingsford Smith</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That the debate be adjourned.</para></quote>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that the debate be adjourned.</para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
</speech>
<division>
          <division.header>
            <body>
              <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [10:17] <br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)</p>
            </body>
          </division.header>
          <division.data>
            <ayes>
              <num.votes>83</num.votes>
              <title>AYES</title>
              <names>
                <name>Ananda-Rajah, M.</name>
                <name>Andrews, K. L.</name>
                <name>Archer, B. K.</name>
                <name>Bell, A. M.</name>
                <name>Belyea, J. A.</name>
                <name>Birrell, S. J.</name>
                <name>Boyce, C. E.</name>
                <name>Buchholz, S.</name>
                <name>Burnell, M. P.</name>
                <name>Burns, J.</name>
                <name>Caldwell, C. M.</name>
                <name>Chester, D. J.</name>
                <name>Chesters, L. M.</name>
                <name>Coker, E. A.</name>
                <name>Coleman, D. B.</name>
                <name>Conaghan, P. J.</name>
                <name>Doyle, M. J. J.</name>
                <name>Dutton, P. C.</name>
                <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                <name>Fletcher, P. W.</name>
                <name>Freelander, M. R.</name>
                <name>Gee, A. R.</name>
                <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                <name>Gillespie, D. A.</name>
                <name>Gorman, P.</name>
                <name>Hamilton, G. R.</name>
                <name>Hastie, A. W.</name>
                <name>Hill, J. C.</name>
                <name>Hogan, K. J.</name>
                <name>Howarth, L. R.</name>
                <name>Joyce, B. T. G.</name>
                <name>Katter, R. C.</name>
                <name>Landry, M. L.</name>
                <name>Lawrence, T. N.</name>
                <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                <name>Leeser, J.</name>
                <name>Leigh, A. K.</name>
                <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                <name>Littleproud, D.</name>
                <name>Marino, N. B.</name>
                <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                <name>McBride, E. M.</name>
                <name>McCormack, M. F.</name>
                <name>McIntosh, M. I.</name>
                <name>McKenzie, Z. A.</name>
                <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                <name>Mitchell, B. K.</name>
                <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                <name>O'Brien, E. L.</name>
                <name>O'Brien, L. S.</name>
                <name>O'Connor, B. P. J.</name>
                <name>Pasin, A.</name>
                <name>Pearce, G. B.</name>
                <name>Phillips, F. E.</name>
                <name>Pike, H. J.</name>
                <name>Pitt, K. J.</name>
                <name>Ramsey, R. E. (Teller)</name>
                <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                <name>Rowland, M. A.</name>
                <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                <name>Smith, D. P. B. (Teller)</name>
                <name>Spender, A. M.</name>
                <name>Stevens, J.</name>
                <name>Sukkar, M. S.</name>
                <name>Swanson, M. J.</name>
                <name>Taylor, A. J.</name>
                <name>Tehan, D. T.</name>
                <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                <name>Thistlethwaite, M. J.</name>
                <name>Thompson, P.</name>
                <name>van Manen, A. J.</name>
                <name>Vasta, R. X.</name>
                <name>Violi, A. A.</name>
                <name>Wallace, A. B.</name>
                <name>Watts, T. G.</name>
                <name>Webster, A. E.</name>
                <name>Willcox, A. J.</name>
                <name>Wilson, R. J.</name>
                <name>Wolahan, K.</name>
                <name>Young, T. J.</name>
              </names>
            </ayes>
            <noes>
              <num.votes>6</num.votes>
              <title>NOES</title>
              <names>
                <name>Bandt, A. P. (Teller)</name>
                <name>Bates, S. J.</name>
                <name>Chandler-Mather, M. (Teller)</name>
                <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                <name>Wilkie, A. D.</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 />Debate adjourned.</p>
            </body>
          </division.result>
        </division></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>20</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Better and Fairer Schools (Information Management) Bill 2024</title>
          <page.no>20</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="r7232" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Better and Fairer Schools (Information Management) Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>20</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FLETCHER</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
    <electorate>Bradfield</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Better and Fairer Schools (Information Management) Bill 2024, which is concerned with extending the unique student identifier to students in the schools sector. The unique student identifier has been in use for higher education and vocational education and training students since 2015. It is an important reform measure implemented by the former coalition government's National School Reform Agreement. The unique student identifier is a simple but powerful tool. Allocating a unique student identifier—a number issued by the Office of the Student Identifiers Registrar—to every school student will help provide a better understanding of a student's progress throughout their school life. As has been agreed between federal, state and territory education ministers, the student identifier will effectively travel with a student when they move from one school to another, from one school system to another or from one state or territory to another. This enables the efficient and timely transfer of a student's information, meaning key information about learning progress can be easily identified.</para>
<para>Subject to the agreement of education ministers, there is also the potential to use a student identifier for a broader range of purposes such as supporting the identification of students who are falling through the cracks or to target students needing additional support throughout any part of their school life. This could assist with building the evidence to deliver improved teaching methods or identifying issues surrounding school refusal, non-attendance or withdrawal from school.</para>
<para>We know that the unique student identifier works. Since 2015 more than 15.6 million unique student identifiers have been generated for higher education and vocational education and training students. Of course, it's important to recognise the privacy considerations with a policy measure like this and ensure that there are appropriate privacy protections in place. Protecting an individual's personal information is of the utmost importance. Importantly, this bill specifies the limited circumstances where the collection, use and disclosure of information is authorised. Any other collections, uses or disclosures of this information will be unauthorised and taken to be an interference with an individual's privacy under the Privacy Act 1998. I do note here that we are yet to see the long-promised reforms to the Privacy Act that the government states that it is committed to. The bill also provides that the Student Identifiers Registrar and any other entity of administering school identifiers would be required to protect this information from misuse or unauthorised access.</para>
<para>The universal student identifier is hardly the only matter deserving of the urgent attention of the minister for education. Last week's NAPLAN results show that, as a nation, we have a lot of work to do to raise school standards. We need every tool in the toolkit to support student learning, engagement and progress from primary school through to higher education. One in three students is effectively failing NAPLAN. In my home state of New South Wales the report card is dim. The results show more than 29.5 per cent of New South Wales school students are now below the national minimum proficiency standards in literacy and numeracy. That compares to 28 per cent last year, with the youngest children assessed in the testing program struggling the most. The latest results of the OECD-run Program for International Student Assessment, or PISA, released late last year reflect stagnation in the short term but a long-term decline. The average year 10 student is one year behind in their learning compared to 20 years ago. PISA tells us that nearly half of all students tested perform below expectation in maths, with 43 per cent failing to meet the grade in reading and 42 per cent in science.</para>
<para>The coalition is strongly focused on the need for a back-to-basics approach in education, sharply focused on literacy and numeracy, underpinned by explicit teaching and a knowledge-rich, commonsense curriculum. As the Australian Education Research Organisation continues to show, evidence based teaching methods are critical to raising school standards. Perhaps the minister could spend less time coming up with heartwarming stories for question time and more time knuckling down on his ministerial briefs.</para>
<para>I also wish to note with concern the government's failure to deliver the next national school reform agreement. While there is a signed agreement with the Northern Territory and an agreement in principle with Western Australia, a full-blown school funding war has erupted between the Commonwealth and the remaining five states and the Australian Capital Territory. It's worth noting that all of these but Tasmania are Labor governments. The Western Australian government has agreed in principle only, while the other states continue to engage in a public war with Minister Clare over funding arrangements. This says a lot about Labor's misleading election commitment to provide 'full and fair funding' and the education minister's failure to work constructively with state and territory education ministers.</para>
<para>While the draft agreement proposes a number of important reforms, including evidence based teaching, screening tests such as the year 1 phonics check and improved student attendance and performance targets, the reforms are both light on detail and inadequate. We continue to urge the government to respond to the coalition's Senate inquiry on classroom disruption and include important recommendations such as a national behaviour curriculum into the next National School Reform Agreement, which was initially due to be finalised more than a year ago.</para>
<para>The PISA results tell us that we have some of the unruliest classrooms in the world, with the most recent findings from the <inline font-style="italic">Journal of School Violence</inline> revealing that a quarter of all Australian teachers feel unsafe at work. It is incumbent on the government to take action on this very important issue.</para>
<para>I conclude by observing that it is pleasing that the coalition's leadership in relation to the unique student identifier has attracted strong bipartisan support. This is an important measure for school students now and into the future, when its use could potentially be expanded. We trust this will provide meaningful, practical support to young Australians and their families and lead to better school outcomes. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Universities Accord (Student Support and Other Measures) Bill 2024</title>
          <page.no>21</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="r7231" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Universities Accord (Student Support and Other Measures) Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>21</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FLETCHER</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
    <electorate>Bradfield</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Universities Accord (Student Support and Other Measures) Bill 2024, a bill that amends the Higher Education Support Act and gives effect to several measures from the Australian Universities Accord final report. These measures include: changing the way HELP indexation is calculated, to use the lower of either the consumer price index, the CPI, or the wage price index, the WPI, backdated to the 2023 and 2024 indexation years; the introduction of a Commonwealth prac payment for teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work students; FEE-FREE Uni Ready courses for students to undertake preparatory courses to prepare for university studies; and requiring universities to provide 40 per cent of the student services and amenities fee to student led organisations.</para>
<para>While the coalition will not stand in the way of this bill in the House, there are many unanswered questions, which is why it is important that there be an inquiry into this bill in the other place. We hold a range of concerns about this bill, and that inquiry will allow an opportunity to fully interrogate this bill. The coalition welcomes any initiative to combat escalating student debt, which has occurred on this government's watch. However, the claims that the government is wiping $3 billion in student debt are misleading.</para>
<para>Let's remember the damage this government has caused. In 2023, indexation was at its highest level since 1990, 7.1 per cent, increasing the average student loan of $26,500 by more than $1,800. This year, indexation was 4.7 per cent, increasing the average student loan by around $1,250. In just these two years alone, student debt balances have increased on average by $4,000. In contrast, under the coalition, indexation averaged 1.7 per cent per year. The proposal to change HELP indexation to the lower of the wage price index or the consumer price index would, if passed, still result in student debts increasing by 11.1 per cent since June 2022. In the meantime, students have become one of the hardest hit groups when it comes to the cost-of-living crisis gripping our nation.</para>
<para>We know that Australians are paying 20 per cent more personal income tax while real wages have dropped by nine per cent. We know that the price of everyday essentials is going up: food is up by 11 per cent, health costs are up by 11 per cent, education is up by 11 per cent, housing is up by 15 per cent, rent is up by 15 per cent, electricity is up by 22 per cent and gas has seen a staggering 25 per cent increase.</para>
<para>And, while this government has talked big on reducing student HECS debts, this bill does not include a date by which student debt credits will be applied or refunds will be paid. In other words, despite all of the rhetoric, students don't know when that HECS relief will be credited to their accounts or land in their bank accounts. While the bill sets the formula for the calculation methods, the explanatory memorandum and the minister's speech do not offer any further detail as to when credits will be applied. This is a significant oversight, given the government's sweeping claims about this being a measure that will ease financial pressures on Australians.</para>
<para>The other big unknown is how much money will be paid as a refund. Most of the refunds, in fact, will end up as a credit against a HECS loan account and may very well be eaten up by future rises in that balance as a result of indexation, meaning that there will be very little actual cost-of-living relief to many of the purported beneficiaries.</para>
<para>Let me turn to the issue of prac payments. Students studying teaching, nursing, midwifery or social work work hard. Student teachers do around 80 days of work placement as part of their university studies, student nurses do around 800 hours, midwifery students do around 1,300 hours, and social workers do 1,000 hours. Skills shortages exist across these sectors and are particularly acute in regional areas. The coalition recognises all of these realities, but we cannot avoid stating an obvious problem with this bill: it fails to provide any detail on how students will be eligible, means tested or paid.</para>
<para>The Australian Universities Accord review noted that students who undertake work placement as part of their course studies can face financial constraints when they need to cease their part-time employment to do their work placements. Recommendation 14 in the final report is:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… the Australian Government work with tertiary education providers, state and territory governments, industry, business and unions to introduce financial support for unpaid work placements. This should include funding by governments for the nursing, care and teaching professions, and funding by employers generally (public and private) for other fields.</para></quote>
<para>But, in rolling out this measure, there appears to have been no consultation with state and territory governments or industry about sharing the cost of the measure. This is despite the fact that it will be the states and territories which will derive an obvious public policy benefit from incoming teachers, nurses, midwives and social workers. There certainly has been no consultation with the education sector about the implementation of the payment.</para>
<para>Despite the payment description, the amount will be benchmarked to the 'single' rate of Austudy at $319.50 per week, which will be taxed. It also will not be delivered via Centrelink but through a so-called grant bucket, from which the universities or higher education providers will have to seek payments. Whilst it's not in this bill, the government confirmed during budget estimates that eligible students will face a means test that will require them to be eligible for an income support payment and to meet a need-to-work requirement. Students will also need to have worked for a minimum of 15 hours per week for the previous four weeks before applying for the payment. This is a concerning omission which should have been more clearly outlined in the legislation, rather than being hidden in the guidelines.</para>
<para>It's also worth noting that, since the government announced this measure, veterinary students have raised concerns that they have been excluded. They undertake placements of around 2,000 hours. Psychology students have also put their hands up. They notch around 1,500 hours in placements. It is important for these students to understand why they've been left out when they are also acquiring skills that will be in high demand in the workplace. Students have also expressed disappointment over delays, with the new payment not being set to start until 1 July 2025, halfway through the next school and university year. The government needs to explain the reason for this. Universities remain in the dark when it comes to the detail they require.</para>
<para>This bill also includes funding for fee-free courses, which currently exist and are currently known as 'enabling places'. This appears to be more of a rebadging exercise than anything else. Enabling courses provide an alternative pathway into university for people who need to further their skills before entering higher education. It might be students who have not completed year 12, did not achieve the marks required for entry to university or are kickstarting their studies at a mature age. These courses prepare them for university study by providing a range of skills from preparatory essay writing to maths and computer skills. The course range is very diverse.</para>
<para>Students study, on average, 10 hours per week over a 16-week period. In 2022 around 25,000 students studied in enabling course. Around 88 per cent of these undertook their studies in a Commonwealth-supported place with no student contribution applied—meaning it was completely free to the student. Students can study them right now and at no cost. We await further details as to how these courses will be delivered.</para>
<para>This bill will also deliver the government's 2024-25 budget measure and mandate a minimum of 40 per cent of the student services and amenities fee revenue be directed to student-led organisations, including student associations, student unions and student guilds. Students studying at university or with a higher education provider pay what is known as a student services and amenities fee. It is set to a maximum amount each year—this year it sits $351—and is collected by universities to provide non-academic support. This includes help with housing, health and welfare, career advice, the provision of library or study areas, financial advice, legal services, and providing food and drinks. In 2022 more than $257 million was collected through these fees. The Accord report noted that while universities have discretion on how they use these funds—as long as they use them for the intended purpose—it is a financial source that student unions rely on heavily. The coalition remains deeply concerned that this bill lacks any measures that require transparency over how unions, guilds and associations use this funding.</para>
<para>I close by noting that while the intent behind the Universities Accord (Student Support and Other Measures) Bill 2024 is to ease the burden on students and address critical needs within the education sector, the coalition has a range of concerns which 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's economic mismanagement and high inflation has resulted in escalating student debt for some 3 million Australians with a HELP (Higher Education Loan Program) loan;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) the proposal to change HELP indexation to the lower of the wage price index or the consumer price index would still result in student debts increasing by 11.1 per cent since June 2022, with no date by which student debt credits will be applied or refunds paid;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) whether it is student debt, housing or paying bills, Australians continue to suffer acute cost-of living pain under this Government;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) the Government has failed to detail eligibility criteria for the Commonwealth Prac Payments or how students will receive those payments, noting that students studying in other areas of workforce shortage such as occupational therapy, psychology and veterinary studies have been excluded from the scheme;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) the Government's decision to mandate 40 per cent of the Student Services and Amenities Fee revenue be directed to student led organisations, including student unions, associations and guilds, lacks any transparency measures to ensure money is spent on services which support student welfare; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) the bill has been referred to the Senate Education and Employment Legislation Committee for inquiry to report by 3 October 2024".</para></quote>
<para>The government's headline-grabbing announcements, from HELP indexation changes to Commonwealth Prac Payments, may sound promising, but look beneath the surface and it's a very different story. At a time when the university sector is in turmoil over this mismanagement of international students, including the discriminatory treatment of regional and smaller universities, transparency and accountability are critical. The opposition looks forward to obtaining further detail through the inquiry to be conducted in the other place.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the amendment seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Stevens</name>
    <name.id>176304</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>Future Made in Australia Bill 2024, Future Made in Australia (Omnibus Amendments No. 1) Bill 2024</title>
          <page.no>23</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="r7219" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Future Made in Australia Bill 2024</span>
                </p>
              </a>
            </p>
            <a href="r7223" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Future Made in Australia (Omnibus Amendments No. 1) Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>23</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STEGGALL</name>
    <name.id>175696</name.id>
    <electorate>Warringah</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I do welcome this day, in being able to speak on this legislation, the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 and the Future Made in Australia (Omnibus Amendments No. 1) Bill 2024. Since July 2023, the average global temperature has consistently exceeded one 1.5 degrees Celsius, above preindustrial levels. I would like to remind all members and our broad community that 1.5 degrees is not just a target and not just a goal. It is a very important threshold that all within the scientific community have recognised as a threshold beyond which major consequences will occur that impact all of us: all of our communities, our children and their children and our environments—everything that we take for granted in our lives.</para>
<para>It's very important to keep in mind the 'why'—why it is important that we supercharge our transition towards clean technologies and clean energy and ensure we develop that capacity. This is a new industrial revolution. This is an opportunity to be part of a global race. Unfortunately, we are behind. I'm a very competitive person, with my background in sport, and it's frustrating to think of where Australia is in this race and the opportunities that we are still reaching for. So we must rapidly develop and supercharge new technologies to rapidly reduce emissions. We must be mindful of that 1.5-degree threshold.</para>
<para>What do we know needs to happen for that to occur? We need to keep up and accelerate the momentum to net zero, and that also means having a net zero economy in the face of what is occurring around the world. We know there is a race on. We now are on the starting line, but we have to accelerate. Progress is possible, but it's not guaranteed. We must have policies that look to the future and that underpin the transition that has to happen.</para>
<para>So I do commend the government. The Future Made in Australia proposal in front of us is a major piece of the economic puzzle that will get us through that transition to a more prosperous future. Whilst we are at record temperatures, there are also records and inflection moments in our economy. There continues to be those who want to delay the transition to clean technologies, to achieving net zero. They want to hold on to the past and they want to stop progress. They want to continue with fossil fuels. They want to continue to spread falsehoods and lies, to give reasons for delay, instead of embracing the opportunity that this global race represents—the move to net zero and to an economy that is sustainable and that will nurture not just our prosperity but also our health and wellbeing and environment.</para>
<para>We know that we need strong, new domestic and export industries. They will be essential to Australia's prosperity. By embracing the race to net zero, we can have an outsized impact on global emissions. This is the bit that always just bewilders me: deniers and people condoning delay who keep talking about what the rest of the world is doing. But the reality is that our environment and our atmosphere does not recognise country borders. As global warming occurs, everyone will be impacted. So what we do with our scope 3 emissions, through our export industries, matters. It will have a direct consequence on every one of our communities.</para>
<para>The fact is that Australia is the second highest contributor to global emissions through its export industries, but we cannot wipe our hands of that. You cannot on one hand say, 'Show me the money and look at all that export funding and revenue,' but then say, 'The problems of global warming and the cost that is coming are just things we can't tackle.' Whilst we don't account for those scope 3 emissions, we will pay the price of them, in their consequences and in the impact on global warming.</para>
<para>I repeat: Australia is the second highest contributor to global emissions through its export industries. The carbon released in the downstream processing of many Australian commodities is huge. According to the Sunshot Alliance, emissions associated with the transport and processing of iron ore is estimated to be around 900 million tonnes annually. That is nearly double all the domestic emissions in Australia. Just pause to think about the scale of that. In working on our clean energy future, we must also address transitioning our export industries and having something more positive to contribute to the world.</para>
<para>That is where the Future Made in Australia program will help us achieve that. Our biggest competitors are already miles ahead of us in this clean energy bonanza and focus, and we need to catch up fast. That's why I commend the scale of the commitment by the government over the next 10 years in supporting that development of clean technologies domestically and through our export industries.</para>
<para>The core aim of this legislation is that Australia needs to rebuild and modernise our export and manufacturing sectors in a climate focused, sustainable way. Embracing this trajectory means we will see hundreds of thousands of well-paying industrial jobs created, support regional and rural economies, and contribute significantly to decarbonisation actions not only in Australia but, importantly, globally. We must do our job as global citizens.</para>
<para>This year's budget included $22.7 billion towards targeted measures for renewable hydrogen, critical minerals processing, and battery and solar manufacturing. Upping the government's investment means a long-term, ambitious package can deliver at least $300 billion a year to clean export revenue by 2035, with about 700,000 direct jobs estimated, mainly, again, in rural and regional Australia.</para>
<para>Australia has been a laggard on climate action. It's what brought me into this place, when the people of Warringah and so many others around Australia were so frustrated at politics being played rather than opportunities being embraced. We're starting to catch up, but we need to pick up the pace. We need to get the car started. We need to keep supporting the transition. We need to accelerate decarbonisation, as the world is reaching dangerous temperature points. We know there are many races happening at the moment. There is a race happening when it comes to the temperatures, but we also have a race—a global one—for skills, industries and investment.</para>
<para>I hosted a roundtable just yesterday to acknowledge climate risk, and the loud and clear message that came out of it was that we will not be able to insure our way out of climate risk and disaster. It is not going to be economically feasible. So the incentive, loud and clear, is to focus on mitigation of emissions and on transition in all aspects of our systems and economy.</para>
<para>The US, since passing its Inflation Reduction Act in 2022, has seen a huge growth in green technology investment. It has drawn, as if it were a magnet, so much investment and focus on manufacturing opportunities to the US. The EU met that challenge by passing the European Green Deal. It has also focused on developing its own capacity and support for manufacturing and export industries. But we have been slow, and I have been critical of the government. We needed a fast response to the Inflation Reduction Act and the European Green Deal.</para>
<para>For us to keep in that race, there are three key, important things in this legislation. Firstly, it will supercharge clean industries, the exact industries we need to reach our emissions reduction goals: batteries, electric vehicles, solar panels, wind turbines, and clean ways of making steel, aluminium and other key materials needed for a net-zero economy. These industries are all scaling up. Our sun, wind and mineral wealth right here in Australia means manufacturing can play a crucial part in cutting climate pollution here and around the globe.</para>
<para>Secondly, it will build on the progress we have made. Since 2022, there have been a number of significant pieces of legislation passed through this House by the government, relating to the reformed safeguard mechanism, the Emissions Reduction Fund, the Renewable Energy Target scheme, the Renewable Energy Agency, the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, the Capacity Investment Scheme and the Net Zero Economy Authority. Some of these schemes and agencies are working towards a clean energy economy, but it would be remiss just to give a pass mark. I say to the government that that is not enough. Those pieces of legislation are pieces of the puzzle, but they are all brought together, overwhelmingly, by what targets, incentives and direction we set and what message we send out to investors and the global community when it comes to Australia's commitment to emissions reduction.</para>
<para>There is a moment coming up in just a few months for the Albanese government to really say if it is fair dinkum about emissions reduction, limiting climate change and doing our bit in keeping to 1.5 degrees, and that will be when we determine what our target will be for the nationally determined contribution under the Paris Agreement. We have to lodge our contribution for 2035 in a few short months. We have heard absolute silence from the opposition. They still have not come to grips with the fact that we must have strong interim targets that keep us within safe temperature goals. The government has a challenge on its plate. It must step up to the plate with a strong 2035 target. I am strongly urging the government to commit to a floor of a 75 per cent emissions reduction by 2035. That sets the trajectory and the road map and sends the message loud and clear to all investors in the global technology race that Australia is fair dinkum when it comes to reducing emissions. Underpinned with pieces of legislation like Future Made in Australia, Australia can get ahead in this race.</para>
<para>This bill is part of an emerging consensus that government must play a role in the net zero transition. In the budget the government nominated five priority areas for Future Made in Australia: renewable hydrogen, green metals, low carbon liquid fuels and clean energy manufacturing. I'd urge the government to also keep a focus on our domestic emissions to make sure that we are electrifying households, fast-tracking the transition to clean transport and looking at technologies like vehicle-to-grid charging. We need to make sure that we are using all the tools in the toolkit to get us there. In practical terms, the Future Made in Australia Bill establishes the National Interest Framework, which will guide decision-making when public-sector investments are made. There are two streams of the National Interest Framework: the net zero transformation stream and the economic resilience and security stream. There will be community benefit principles embedded in all of those aspects, and they are designed to ensure that public investment and the investment that it generates lead to a benefit for communities impacted.</para>
<para>But there are still some details that need to be worked out. I have been engaging with the Treasurer and many of my colleagues around guardrails and greater clarification to be certain of the direction this Future Made in Australia will take us. We are well positioned in our region to take advantage of the transition that is happening globally. As a key trading nation in the Asian region, we can leverage this investment. It's a strategic national-interest focused response, and it can be bold and ambitious. The old economic consensus is shifting. Markets remain central to making it happen, and we need to acknowledge that relying on traditional competitive advantage in that transition to net zero is difficult. But a US$4.6 trillion annual investment opportunity exists globally, and it is there for the taking. We must be key players and participate in it.</para>
<para>So I urge the government to get ambitious and to make sure that we focus on the right sectors to get bang for buck when it comes to public investment. We need to focus on technologies that are genuinely focused on 1.5 degrees and emissions reduction, not just offsetting or kicking something down the road. It must be focused on that. We also have to make sure we engage with communities and that First Nations have a true voice in this process and are considered.</para>
<para>This bill establishes a road map for the future. This is an investment for future generations. It will directly impact the prosperity of the next generations, so we need to make this transition to clean energy as effective and efficient as possible. That means no more gas exploration. This is where the government is again just so conflicted, with their focus on a future gas strategy. You cannot continue to have more gas exploration. We have enough gas. We just need to prioritise where we use it and where it's applied. We need no more coal. The consequences of continuing down those roads and not mitigating climate change will decimate our economy. There's no point in investing in the future if you continue with old technologies that undo all the good work and keep making the problem worse.</para>
<para>I commend the bill to the House, I support the government on the Future Made in Australia, I commend the Treasurer, and I ask him to consider the amendments put forward in good faith to make sure that this bill is robust and delivers its purpose.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LAWRENCE</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
    <electorate>Hasluck</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I speak in favour of the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 and the Future Made in Australia (Omnibus Amendments No. 1) Bill 2024.This legislation is a supportive and measured response to the global climatic and international economic circumstances that the government must respond to. Failure to take action and respond to these circumstances would be a failure to govern. I note that the Liberal and National parties appear to intend to vote against this legislation. That would be a failure to grapple earnestly with the challenges of our time and, for the students up in the gallery here today, this would be a missed opportunity for their future that will be made here in Australia. If all the coalition can do is carp from the sidelines and indulge in spurious nuclear fantasies then they will not be fit to govern for some time. They need to accept the science where they haven't, come to understand the international efforts by our trading partners in the space and realise that it would be dangerous for us as a nation to fail to maximise our opportunities in what is a new economic paradigm. Whether the coalition can do all of this without some sort of root-and-branch renewal of their parties is perhaps the most interesting question posed by this debate. What seems possible at the moment is that the coalition will only catch up with the world in 10 or 20 years time. Certainly the world can't wait for the coalition and neither can this parliament.</para>
<para>The Future Made in Australia Bill is a simple and efficient bill that runs to 15 clauses. It does five simple things. Firstly, it creates a national interest framework to guide the federal government's consideration and decision-making in relation to the way public support encourages private investment at scale. That framework has two streams. The first is directed towards the net zero economy and the second towards economic resilience and security. There will be a significant and increasing overlap between these streams as time goes on. For the net zero economy stream, we seek sectors that can provide a sustained comparative advantage and for which public investment is likely to be needed. For the resilience and security stream, the domestic production must be a necessary or efficient way to deliver the outcome and unlikely to occur without government support. I note that it is 'necessary or efficient', not 'necessary and efficient'. This government takes security in all its forms, including supply chains, seriously.</para>
<para>Secondly, it directs certain matters to be considered in sector assessments in determining the role that a sector can reasonably play in a future made in Australia. Not every sector, industry or product will be one for which domestic production makes economic sense. As an example, we may find that the production of wind turbine blades is better done offshore whilst nevertheless supporting a local company developing wind turbine gearboxes here and eventually exporting those to the region.</para>
<para>Thirdly, importantly, it outlines the community benefit principles which must be applied in making decisions about the provision of support. The legislation provides that the support needs to lead to safe and secure jobs, skill development, positive benefits for local communities, including Indigenous communities, strengthening local supply chains and transparency in tax affairs. Further community benefit principles can be provided for in the rules.</para>
<para>The fourth thing that this bill does is provide for certain investment programs to be identified as Future Made in Australia supports. The legislation does not limit the nature of those supports, which may include grants, loans, equity investments and others. Regardless of the nature of the support, what is important is that the community benefit principles do apply.</para>
<para>Fifthly, it requires plans to be provided by recipients of support that outline the way in which the projects will meet those community benefit principles. Clear commitments to meeting the community benefit principles will always be required.</para>
<para>So these are five simple things, but through this legislation we create an overarching framework within which the interface between the federal government and private sector investment, both domestic and international, will be encouraged, supported and governed. It is a framework for a future made in Australia.</para>
<para>We're not doing this, though, in a vacuum. Indeed, we are playing catch-up. Two years ago, the Inflation Reduction Act in the US created great hope and a great challenge. The Albanese government's policies on climate change and energy and nation-building are meeting that challenge. The executive summary of Building a Clean Economy, the policy paper issued by the White House in January 2023, states:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The Inflation Reduction Act's $370 billion in investments will lower energy costs for families and small businesses, accelerate private investment in clean energy solutions in every sector of the economy and every corner of the country, strengthen supply chains for everything from critical minerals to efficient electric appliances, and create good-paying jobs and new economic opportunities for workers.</para></quote>
<para>There are clear parallels in the current bill.</para>
<para>The US challenge has been met in Europe. Just this month, Germany's cabinet provided 57.6 billion euros for green investments in 2025, increasing subsidies to help the country become net zero by 2045. The allocation includes 18.9 billion euros for construction, 12.6 billion euros for renewable energy, 4.0 billion euros for EV charging infrastructure, 4.1 billion euros for local production of renewable components and 4.0 billion euros for semiconductor production. Much of this investment is directed not only to net zero but also to resilience and strengthening local supply chains.</para>
<para>In the face of what is a global movement, the contribution so far by members of the opposition parties to this bill has been disappointing. The member for Mallee made a reference to Disney and then made a Fantasia-level error of calling green hydrogen 'experimental'. That would come as a surprise to many companies around the world manufacturing green hydrogen today, like Linde and Shell.</para>
<para>The member for Riverina referred to what he called a 'rush to renewables' as if that was a bad thing. That language indicates that perhaps the member doesn't understand the gravity of our urgent need to move to renewable energy. He also raised the coalition's three-eyed nuclear red herring. The coalition has been talking about nuclear power in opposition for the last 30 years or more—never in government, just in opposition.</para>
<para>The member for Riverina may be interested in a recent study from the Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems in Germany. The study found that solar and battery systems are now much cheaper than coal or gas power plants or new nuclear—much cheaper.</para>
<para>And the member for Hume, true to form, raised integrity concerns and used the word 'pork-barrelling'. I'm sure the member for Hume is capable of writing a book on the subject, but it is a strange thing to raise as an objection to a bill that quite clearly sets out a framework with legislative community benefit principles. Sometimes it feels like the member for Hume lives in an alternative universe only somewhat similar to our own.</para>
<para>The member for Hinkler thinks it's wrong for the government to want to use something called the National Interest Framework to guide decisions. The member for Casey complained that government members were spending too long talking about the opposition in this debate, and he could be right, but the opposition is certainly the gift that keeps on giving in this space. The member then calls renewables a single technology. Renewables aren't one technology. The hint is in the plural. Renewables are many and varied and complementary, and they include solar and wind, both on and offshore, geothermal and hydro and others, and they're supported by all different kinds of storage. I invite the member for Casey to seek to correct his error.</para>
<para>We are in a transition. We need to wean ourselves, over time, off coal and reduce our need for gas, which will nevertheless play a firming role for the foreseeable future. We need to take action to help our trading partners do exactly the same thing. Transitions take time and need to be planned, which is something the Greens unfortunately don't seem to understand. This bill is a crucial part of the Albanese government's plan, which began with climate change legislation two years ago and has already seen a record investment in renewables. But a transition requires something else, too. It requires a long-term commitment. I hope it can be a shared commitment. I want to see the coalition come on board, not with nuclear pretence but with real policy.</para>
<para>The Commonwealth Bank's commendable early announcement last week to stop funding fossil fuel projects is the first in a series we will see from like banks and other finance companies. In fact, some years back, the ANZ Bank stopped funding coal. I acknowledge their leadership in this space. In the parliament, we also need to lead. As Prime Minister, Scott Morrison brought a lump of coal into this place and brandished it in a silly way, thus indicating he wasn't on board with any transition. Even today, Senator Babet has a lump of coal in his office window. These absolute failures are on show.</para>
<para>But the coalition needs to take a step forward now. It's time for them to acknowledge that we need to engage with the transition, either due to the threat of climate change or, at the very least, due to the economic imperative that squarely faces us. To do anything else would be to fail to lead. The government seeks to create the conditions whereby we can become a renewable energy superpower within the transition to a global net zero economy. There is no reason why the Liberal Party and the National Party can't engage in that effort too. In fact, I know they will, but I hope they will start today. I expect they will start shortly after the coming election. I fear, however, they will continue to leave it for years and years, when they've already caused years and years of delays—10 years of delays, in fact, that we could ill afford. We need to attract investment. We are in a global race for this. Over the next few decades, we need to replace our fossil fuel industries with green industries. We need to start now. Indeed, we are late to start, and we are playing catch-up.</para>
<para>Back home in Hasluck, however, industry isn't waiting for the coalition to catch up. BGC is an example of a company in Hasluck in a high-emitting sector: concrete and bricks. They recognise that some of their products are emissions intensive and see it as their responsibility to reduce their emissions profile. They are watching developments elsewhere in WA, like the Collie renewable energy hub supported by the Cook state government, and looking for partners in their endeavours. Taking action now is surely a better course than to continue emitting and waiting for a fantasy of a Collie nuclear power plant to be ready in 30 years time. BGC have also set up their material innovation hub to conduct research and development work, aligning with their commitment to reduce scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions to net zero by 2040.</para>
<para>Earlier this year, ARENA announced funding of $15.8 million to assist Centurion in Hazelmere in Hasluck to roll out 30 battery electric trucks and 15 dual-port chargers to cut emissions from its depot there. Centurion aims to operate Australia's first 100 per cent renewable energy off-grid electric truck fleet. This is just phenomenal and an example of the change that is rapidly coming, and we need to be on board.</para>
<para>Hofmann Engineering in Ashfield operates across the fields of mining, defence, transport, energy, manufacturing and agriculture. It is a splendid example of our ability to rise to the challenge of a future made in Australia. Hofmann Engineering has been repairing and improving the life expectancy of wind turbine gearboxes since 2008.</para>
<para>Fortescue Future Industries in Hazelmere, among other projects, have been designing and testing groundbreaking 100 per cent carbon-free green hydrogen haul trucks and battery electric haul trucks. They've also investigated renewable green hydrogen, green ammonia and battery power for trains, ship engines and surface crawler drills.</para>
<para>We do already have energetic, forward-looking companies that are willing to be part of the solution. They are putting the money into investing in these solutions and working in partnership with our government. However, the challenges before us to address climate change and meet our targets and to transform our economy to one which is net zero at home and exporting as a green energy superpower require investments of a greater magnitude, and this bill sets the grounds for the attraction of that investment. It outlines a careful attitude on the part of this government and an acknowledgement that Australia will not manufacture all things in all sectors; rather, we must play to our strengths.</para>
<para>The Albanese government is up to this task. The people of Hasluck and of Australia can be proud that they have a government, at last, that is prepared to confront this in a serious and realistic manner, take action to get us to net zero, take action to ensure our supply chains are solid, work with our international partners, attract investment and back in innovative Australian companies.</para>
<para>As it is on topic, I'd like to remind all members that Mr Till Mansmann, the German Innovation Commissioner for Green Hydrogen, will address the Australia-Germany interparliamentary group. All interested members, senators and staff are welcome from 10.30 am tomorrow in the committee room 1S3 to discuss green hydrogen and the opportunities that we have before us for international cooperation.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELL</name>
    <name.id>282981</name.id>
    <electorate>Moncrieff</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Cooper stood at the dispatch box and delivered a speech where she declared that the government is the party of working people. We on this side say that the government is the party of working poor people. Under this government, Australians feel poorer simply because they are. Prices are up by 10 per cent, and for working households prices are up over 18 per cent, and Australians know it. They can feel it in their hip pockets every time they go to the supermarket. Personal income taxes are up by 20 per cent, real wages for employees have collapsed by nine per cent, living standards have collapsed by eight per cent, household savings are down by 10 per cent, and a family with a typical mortgage of $750,000 is $35,000 worse off. Where are they getting their money from? That's the question they're asking. The Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 does nothing to alleviate the pressures on struggling families and small businesses. In fact, the big spending agenda is likely to keep inflation higher for longer.</para>
<para>I also particularly enjoyed the member for Adelaide's contribution, where he seamlessly admitted that the great Liberal and Country League premier Sir Thomas Playford was an undeniable visionary for creating the manufacturing satellite city of Elizabeth in South Australia. I've spoken before in this place about my very special connection to Elizabeth and the manufacturing sector. It was where I was born and grew up for the first eight years of my life. There were three generations of Holden workers in my family. Both my brothers, my father and my grandfather—a couple of them got gold watches—were working at General Motors-Holden. My mother was an machinist—an award-winning machinist, I might say; she worked very hard—at Levi Strauss in Elizabeth. It was the vision of Sir Thomas Playford to set up Elizabeth as a satellite city for manufacturing. with affordable houses through the South Australian Housing Trust, that gave me my start in life and gave my family the opportunity to save a little bit of money—to save that deposit for a house. They bought a small house in the northern suburbs of Adelaide. I remember it was about $25,000 back then. They moved from social housing—from the Housing Trust commission home—into their own home, and that certainly helped my education opportunities as a young person. It's because of that background that I really understand the significance of manufacturing.</para>
<para>Also, in my current home—as a Queenslander for almost 30 years and a proud Gold Coaster for 23 years—the local statistics for manufacturing on the Gold Coast from June 2023 tell us that it has been growing at a pace of 1.1 per cent per year for the last 10 years, which is actually higher than the Queensland figure and, indeed, the national figure. The manufacturing sector on the Gold Coast is worth $3.6 billion in exports for Gold Coast businesses. That's $132,018 of productivity per worker, with a total output of—wait for it—a whopping $9.2 billion through sectors such as food, metals, transport, machinery, non-metallic mineral product, beverages and others like, of course, boat-building, of which we are so proud on the Gold Coast. That's just a local snapshot of how important manufacturing is to this country.</para>
<para>Of course, the coalition supports those manufacturers. But, speaking to this bill, the coalition will indeed oppose it, not because we oppose manufacturers, manufacturing or the jobs that they represent but because we oppose bad policy that has not been properly thought out. The role of the opposition is, indeed, to oppose bad policy. That's what good oppositions do. So we are poking holes in the government's legislation to make sure that Australians can see the light on the other side, and this bill has plenty of those holes.</para>
<para>The member for Wentworth, in her contribution from the crossbench, said, 'The bill fails to deliver the framework needed for a renewables future,' and she has brought forward a number of amendments that she thinks will improve the bill. She also outlined that the government should focus on tax reform and cutting red tape. I think we agree on that. I think they are very sensible measures. Perhaps she and all of those others on the crossbench will vote with the opposition on this bill, if they agree that it's all spin and no substance. We'll see after the speeches in the second reading debate.</para>
<para>This is another bad policy from the Labor government, which is out of its depth. It sounds like it's saying all the right things, which Labor loves to do, with headlines like 'national security', 'sovereign capability', 'clean energy' et cetera. It's saying all those things that it thinks it needs to say in order to stay in government. 'A future made in Australia,' it shouts from the rooftops. 'More things made here,' we hear being said. But we ask this government, whose wheels really are falling off at the moment: when will it focus on the right things for Australians right now? When will it focus on delivering all those promises it made before the last election—those promises that we're yet to see materialise, like the promise of affordable, reliable energy? The government should be focused on flexible workplaces—less regulation, not more—and on an incentive based tax system, not billions of dollars on pie-in-the-sky policies.</para>
<para>The government needs to be focused on getting our country back on track and getting those basics right in the economy so that all Australians will benefit from lower inflation, lower grocery prices, lower energy prices and lower mortgage repayments. That's the only way to get this country back on track, and this government simply is not focused on those areas. Their policies on energy, industrial relations and tax are all making Australia a less attractive place to do business, and the facts are very, very clear.</para>
<para>Business insolvencies are up. Productivity is down; it was less than 0.1 per cent in the last quarter. Businesses are struggling to keep their doors open. I know this because I've got about 32,000 of them in my electorate, on the Gold Coast. Hospitality providers are struggling at the moment. We had the Pacific Airshow last weekend, which reportedly brought 400,000 people to the beach in Surfers Paradise—it's a big number, but that's what was reported. Of course, all of the local businesses gobbled up all of that beautiful business that came to the Gold Coast, business that's very, very important for our families on the Gold Coast.</para>
<para>Economist after economist has criticised this policy, and every day we hear more stories about dodgy processes, the lack of economic security and the double standards that apply to this program. The government won't solve the cost-of-living crisis by throwing hard earned taxpayer money around, which is what they're doing—$315 billion of extra money in the economy is keeping your interest payments higher. They're not working with fiscal policy and monetary policy; they're working against them.</para>
<para>The Prime Minister might want to pick winners, but Australian families will lose from Labor's reckless spending and their bad policies, of which this, of course, is one. The Prime Minister has revealed his plan to spend even more money and make productivity worse, and that's failed to gain any support from mainstream economists. With this policy, the government is taking from household budgets to bolster business balance sheets. This is not responsible economic management. I'll take the scoffing from the other side. They think there's something funny about this, but there's not. People are hurting across the nation.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELL</name>
    <name.id>282981</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>They can't pay their bills, Minister. In fact, this big spending agenda is likely to make inflation, as I said, worse. Just like households, governments need to manage their budgets and live within their means. The Albanese government has shown weak economic leadership.</para>
<para>These bills expand the role of Export Finance Australia and ARENA, the Australian Renewable Energy Agency, and establish a national interest framework that retrospectively underpins the government's Future Made in Australia policy. The accompanying omnibus bill expands Export Finance Australia's remit to fund domestic industries and nominates the Minister for Finance as an additional responsible minister.</para>
<para>The omnibus bill also expands ARENA's functions from purely R&D and demonstration to the support of manufacturing, deployment and commercialisation. This legislation fundamentally changes the purpose, duties and roles of ARENA. ARENA has always been a research and development agency. This is clear in its remit, in the explanatory memorandum and the second reading speech. When in opposition, Labor opposed the expansion of that remit to cover sensible net-zero-related R&D expenditure, including into carbon capture and storage and blue hydrogen. How times have changed. Now they are expanding that remit even further into deployment and manufacturing because it suits the interests of their donors. If ARENA is doing deployment, why is the Clean Energy Finance Corporation even needed? If these industries are commercially viable, why do they need government funding? Labor's changes are still more insidious—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Husic</name>
    <name.id>91219</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Focus on detail.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELL</name>
    <name.id>282981</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>because the bill gives the Minister for Climate Change and Energy the ability to boost its funding at a stroke of a pen. That's detail, Minister. No parliamentary oversight—that's detail.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order, Minister! The member is entitled to be heard in silence.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELL</name>
    <name.id>282981</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>No scrutiny, Minister—with just some delegated legislation, the government can roll up to $3.98 billion out the door in an election year. It's a slush fund, plain and simple.</para>
<para>Australian taxpayers are already on the hook for Labor's inflation, and you know it. Labor has spent $315 billion in new spending since the election. That's how much they've spent. They've spent over $30,000 per Australian household. How is that not keeping inflation higher for longer under this irresponsible and recklessly spending government? It has fuelled inflation, and Australians ultimately pay for that. Australian families are already paying the price with 12 interest rate hikes, some of the most stubborn core inflation in the developed world and the higher taxes that come with it. You're paying 20 per cent higher taxes under this government. Australian families just should not be paying that.</para>
<para>Now, don't take it just from me or from others standing here on the coalition side; take it from Danielle Wood, the head of the Productivity Commission. The government's key economic adviser, appointed by the Treasurer, has said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">If we are supporting industries that don't have a long-term competitive advantage, that can be an ongoing cost.</para></quote>
<para>It's baked in. That is what that means. She said further:</para>
<quote><para class="block">It diverts resources, that's workers and capital, away from other parts of the economy where they might generate high value uses.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">We risk creating a class of businesses that is reliant on government subsidies, and that can be very effective in coming back for more.</para></quote>
<para>She has also said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Your infants grow up, they turn into very hungry teenagers and it's kind of hard to turn off the tap.</para></quote>
<para>When asked whether Future Made in Australia contained tax reform, Ms Wood explicitly said it is 'not tax reform'. On alternative policies, including lowering the corporate tax rate, Ms Wood offered it would 'make us more internationally competitive'.</para>
<para>The coalition's alternative is that we must get back to economic basics. The coalition is working to ensure that Australia can play to its strengths. We'll steer our nation out of our current domestic crisis. We'll not just talk about the challenges of our time but meet them head on with action to carve out a more secure future for Australia. Most importantly, we'll make the decisions that set up our nation for success for generations to come. It requires strong economic management, not slogans or handouts, with a plan to get back on track and back to economic basics.</para>
<para>First we'll reign in inflationary spending, as I talked about. Second we'll wind back Labor's intervention and remove regulatory roadblocks, which are suffocating the economy and stopping businesses from getting ahead. We'll condense approval processes and cut back on Labor's red tape, which is killing mining, jobs and entrepreneurialism. Third we'll remove the complexity and hostility of Labor's IR agenda, which is putting unreasonable burdens on business. We'll revert to the former coalition government's simple definition of a casual worker and create certainty for our 2.5 million small businesses across the country, who are employers and who are being tied in knots by this government. Fourth we will provide lower, simpler and fairer taxes for all because Australians should keep more of what they earn. And that's our line, not Labor's. That's what they do; they take a line and they own it. No, we are the party for small business. That's us. We are the party for working Australians. Fifth we'll deliver competition policy which gives consumers and small businesses a fair go, not lobbyists and big corporations. And sixth we'll ensure Australians have more affordable and reliable energy.</para>
<para>Our economic plan, with its tried and tested principles, will restore competitiveness and rebuild economic confidence. The policies that we seek to implement are not just about the next election cycle. They're not just about that election that we're due within eight months. They are a foundation for forging a better Australia and a better future for all Australians, for small and family business in particular and for our country.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HUSIC</name>
    <name.id>91219</name.id>
    <electorate>Chifley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The contrast couldn't be clearer. This side of the House is about avoiding and learning from the mistakes of the past. That side is about repeating them. It's as clear as that. This debate is all about that. The Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 is about recognising the experiences we've had and the challenges we confront. It is about making more things here. It's about playing to our natural advantages. It's about creating secure, well-paying jobs. It is about correcting our economic course so the blunders and bluster of Liberal governments don't define our economic future.</para>
<para>If the pandemic taught us anything, it taught us that our economic resilience is simply not equal to the boasts of our predecessors. It showed us the danger of placing our economic wellbeing in the hands of just one or two other countries—putting all our eggs in one basket. We relied on supply chains that weren't up to the job when tested by a crisis. In the pandemic, the things we needed just weren't there when we needed them the most. Our economic resilience has been absolutely at the mercy of our anti-manufacturing agenda and we cannot have that. We cannot have that agenda define our future prospects.</para>
<para>The truth is that the Liberal and National parties old way of thinking has robbed us of sovereign capability. It's simplified our economy to a dig and ship mentality, and it sent our know-how offshore along with our raw materials. It disrespected science and our ideas and, worst of all, it decimated our industrial base, which generations of Australians spent their blood, sweat and tears building.</para>
<para>We want a stronger economy, not a weak one and not one that is vulnerable to the next global shock or to the whims of another country that wants to turn on or off supply, affecting our prospects. Strong economies possess strong manufacturing capabilities and these capabilities can be used to help respond to national challenges.</para>
<para>The big challenge we face is making the transition to net zero. What our Future Made in Australia legislation aims to do is to build up and mobilise Australian manufacturing to make the things that reduce emissions, using Aussie know-how, that will create a lot of secure, well-paying jobs in the process, especially in our regions. With this bill, we are charting a better and stronger direction to continue the task of rebuilding our industrial and manufacturing base and restore our manufacturing prowess.</para>
<para>We are supporting the quiet contributors to our economy, who for too long have been disrespected and sidelined by the Liberal and National parties. That includes our scientists and researchers, who consistently rank among the top in global ladders in fields such from medical science to robotics to quantum technologies. Our mineral processors and manufacturers can also be scaled up, but are being fed the lie that being the world's quarry should be the limit to our economic aspirations. Most of all, our workers—the welders, the riggers, the technicians, the machinists and the electricians themselves—should all have a better future and not be talked down by turning the economy simply into a services economy with no manufacturing muscle to it whatsoever.</para>
<para>Where others see the mathematics of subtraction, we see addition. The bill commits almost $23 billion to the idea that the right co-investment at the right time in the right area can multiply our advantages, and what advantages we have. For example, we supply half the world its lithium, but we only make one per cent of its batteries. How is it that we have some of the best battery and solar know-how in the world and yet import so many foreign products made for foreign conditions? Why, when we have the best sun and wind resources in the world, are we not capturing and storing that energy with Aussie solar panels, wind turbines and batteries? These are not conundrums that inaction and ideological laziness can answer. It takes a government—this government—committed to action, and backing that action with investment with the private sector to multiply benefits throughout the economy.</para>
<para>We've dedicated $400 million to our industry growth program to support emerging manufacturers through the early stages of their growth to create new industries; more than half a billion dollars for the Battery Breakthrough Initiative to kickstart energy storage manufacturer backed by Australia's first National Battery Strategy and $1.7 billion for the Future Made in Australia Innovation Fund to invest in the know-how coming out of our labs and unis that can help rebuild manufacturing. We have dedicated a billion dollars to the Solar Sunshot project that can employ potentially more workers making next-generation solar panels at New South Wales's old Liddell power station, than what were employed at the old coal-fired power station. They will use Australian technology, Australian ideas—stuff that's being done nowhere else on the planet—to produce more efficient solar panels that give us an edge in manufacturing.</para>
<para>There's $9 billion to develop our critical mineral supply chains, focused on processing and refining through efficient and effective production tax credits with the simple proposition in the tax credits: you make it, you get it. That's the basis on which the credits operate. There's billions in hydrogen production tax credits invested into electrolysers like those being made in Gladstone, Queensland, to scale up green hydrogen for industrial use. There's a green metals plan designed with our steelmakers to give our industrial heartlands in the Illawarra, the Hunter, Gladstone, Whyalla and Collie a sustainable future.</para>
<para>These and other investments we are making in our Future Made in Australia plan work together so everyone will benefit across the country from: secure, well-paid jobs for working families, especially in our regions; secure supply chains so we can confidently confront economic uncertainty; a strong industrial base of skilled workers and cutting-edge technology which will be the foundation for a strong, thriving, modern economy; and plentiful, cheap, clean power and lower emissions, positioning us as a green energy export powerhouse.</para>
<para>Nothing encapsulates our approach to a future made in Australia like an initiative close to my heart, the $15 billion National Reconstruction Fund. This is the one that the scorched earth economic theorists who have driven the agenda in this country struggle with the most. They call it picking winners. <inline font-style="italic">(Q</inline><inline font-style="italic">u</inline><inline font-style="italic">orum formed)</inline> It's called that by those opposite, whose friends have an anti-manufacturing mentality.</para>
<para>The coalition says it's pro manufacturing and then votes against every single thing that supports manufacturing. They drove out 100,000 manufacturing jobs in their time in government. They pushed out auto-manufacturing firms and all the jobs that went with them. They vote against the National Reconstruction Fund. They also voted against energy price relief to help manufacturers. Then they come in here and bemoan energy prices. When they had a chance to do something about it, they voted against it. The coalition doesn't have a plan on energy prices. They won't be able to stump up and deal with the challenges manufacturers face, but they want to pretend. They want to turn up with the cameras and the hi-vis gear to look like manufacturing but then do nothing but sellout manufacturing in the process. Nothing could be clearer, particularly with Queensland members of the LNP refusing to back Queenslanders building frontier technology in this country.</para>
<para>We are in a race in the world to build the first fault-tolerant quantum computer that can be used by industry to crack problems that current computing power can't crack. We had two Queenslanders who are recognised as global leaders step forward. There are countries way bigger than ours that are chasing this technology, and we, Australians, are in front to be able to do that. Queenslanders want to come back to Australia and build this thing that will supercharge our economy. This is in a heritage where we were one of the first countries in the world to build a digital computer, and we shipped it off and never manufactured it here, and that would have made a difference to our economy. We were approached by Intel, the maker of chips, who wanted to set up their fabrication here, and John Howard said, 'Not interested.' Wow, that decision aged well. And now, with PsiQuantum, formed by two Queenslanders, all we've had from those opposite, particularly Queensland LNP members, is criticism.</para>
<para>I get that you have a North Shore Sydney MP in Paul Fletcher, the member for Bradfield, criticising it. But I can't believe this line-up of Queensland LNP members who've chipped it. These are Queensland LNP members who refuse to back their own. They bag out Queenslanders who had to leave the country because, when they were in office, they didn't understand the importance of the technology. They want to come back to Australia and help our country be on the map to create high-paying jobs, build up research capability and strengthen our country's economy. It's unbelievable that the LNP from Queensland, who refused and criticised the deal to work with the Queensland government and invest in this, wouldn't. They were criticising us on the grounds of the way we worked, which is exactly the way they worked when they brought Moderna to Australia. They consulted and negotiated with Moderna while doing a call for an expression of interest in building mRNA manufacturing in this place. They criticised us, saying we backed PsiQuantum instead of local firms, and yet they chose Moderna over CSL, an Australian firm. They did that. And their investment in Silicon Quantum Computing was also delivered as a result of similar processes that delivered these decisions.</para>
<para>I mention this because frontier technology will mean a lot to future economic growth. It will position us in a way where we make the technology to build a stronger economy. Our Future Made in Australia plan is all about building up our capabilities, making more things here and creating good jobs. This is about avoiding the mistakes of the past. That side is about repeating them. We think we can do better.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr THOMPSON</name>
    <name.id>281826</name.id>
    <electorate>Herbert</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The future of Australia depends on a sound economic plan built upon free market principles that allow businesses to thrive and working individuals to get ahead. It depends on a plan that allows small businesses to have a fair go without being punished or pushed out of the market by government funded enterprises. It would allow Australians to keep more of what they earn, not deprive them of their hard-earned income. The Albanese Labor government's so-called Future Made in Australia Bill goes against all sound economic judgement and threatens to cripple the economy. This bill would overwhelm small businesses with more government intervention that will crush the private sector, and it will punish hardworking taxpayers by driving up the cost of living even further through reckless inflationary spending. Labor's Future Made in Australia Bill might be designed to score political points in the short-term, but it will cost Australians severely.</para>
<para>We've already witnessed the disastrous effects of Labor's economic policies on businesses around Australia. Since Labor came to office, 19,000 businesses have entered into insolvency—a record 25-year high. The number of businesses at risk of collapse has increased by 20 per cent since last year. Worker productivity has plummeted, economic growth has stalled, and the cost of doing business has skyrocketed. These hardships have reverberated around the country and are felt in regional towns like Townsville, where small businesses have been hit hard by rising energy bills, insurance costs and commercial rents. I can't visit a business in Townsville without the owner bringing up how much harder it is to make a decent living since the government has taken over. As their expenses mount, they have become less able to invest in growth and sustain job creation, creating a vicious cycle of economic uncertainty in the community. Labor's economic mismanagement has devastating implications on small businesses, and this new bill only promises to deepen this crisis.</para>
<para>This bill will also inflict more cost-of-living pressures on working individuals by unleashing inflationary spending on the economy. This comes at a time when Labor has already shown itself incapable of controlling the inflation caused by its own economic mismanagement. On Labor's watch, prices for working households have skyrocketed by 18 per cent. Workers are now paying 20 per cent more in income tax, and households are losing an average of 10 per cent in savings. The Prime Minister promised that mortgages would go down under his government. They've only gone up. We throw around numbers in this place every day, but behind every statistic is a real person experiencing real financial pain. Families are wondering how they can keep up with their mortgage payments which are rising by tens of thousands of dollars. Working individuals are struggling to keep their heads above water, digging into their savings and taking on extra jobs to make ends meet.</para>
<para>The results are clear. This Labor government has proven itself inept and untrustworthy when it comes to managing the economy of today, let alone the economy of the future. The fact is that Australia is the only G10 economy where core inflation has gone up since December. Labor has spent $315 billion in new spending since the election, with disastrous results for the Australian people. You'd think it would be time to re-evaluate the strategy, but instead Labor is pushing forward with the same plan: to ramp up more inflationary spending to a tune of $22.7 billion through this poorly drafted bill. It's Australian families, working individuals, who will pay for it. They'll be forced to shoulder the resulting tax burden and the cost-of-living pressures.</para>
<para>Regional Australians, in particular, are suffering from the economic failures of this government. Three-quarters of regional Australians, including people in Townsville, are saying that the skyrocketing cost of living is already their biggest concern. Forty-one per cent of regional Australians have said they are experiencing financial difficulties, according to the recent <inline font-style="italic">Mood of the Bush</inline> survey. A major manufacturing business in the electorate of Herbert wrote to me a few months ago, telling me that the cost of power has more than doubled. The owner said to me, 'Government policy is driving inflation,' and they are exactly right. Another local resident told me how their power bills have gone up by 37 per cent. They are age pensioners. It's not an increase they can afford. What's the government's solution to this national problem? It's not to solve the underlying supply issues in the electricity network. Labor's economic mismanagement has inflicted a real cost-of-living crisis on hardworking Australians, and Labor's Future Made in Australia Bill promises to take even more from them.</para>
<para>This bill expands the power of the government to pick and choose those who get to be winners in a government directed economy. This begs the question: if these industries are already commercially viable, why do they need to be bankrolled by the government? Under this scheme, the Treasurer will get to decide which businesses are worthy of investment. But the Treasurer has never owned or operated a business, and his bureaucrats already have a track record of suffocating the entrepreneurial spirit that has made our nation prosperous.</para>
<para>Meanwhile, through this bill, you can be sure the friends of Labor will receive a big slice of the cake. Labor is promising $22.7 billion to the so-called national interest sector but refuses to be transparent and specific about who stands to benefit. We've already seen Labor breaking their own rules to invest in pet projects, like Minister Husic's decision to bankroll PsiQuantum without any departmental consultation, bypassing the National Interest Framework. Likewise, the Treasury was not consulted about the decision to back solar manufacturing, which it later concluded was not a sound investment. Even when Labor has attempted to subsidise the mineral industry through its production credits for nickel factories, price pressures still spiralled out of control thanks to rising energy costs, increased taxes and overbearing workplace laws. If Labor has been unable to empower the industries of today, how can we expect it to advance the industries of tomorrow?</para>
<para>Economists across the board are already sounding the alarm that Labor's poorly designed Future Made in Australia Bill will do more harm than good. The Chair of the Productivity Commission, the government's key economic adviser, appointed by the Treasurer, has said, 'We risk creating a class of businesses that is reliant on government subsidies'. If we are supporting industries that don't have long-term competitive advantage, that can be an ongoing cost. A former chair of the Productivity Commission has said that the Future Made in Australia bill is a 'fool's errand' that will risk repeating the mistakes of the past by propping up 'political favourites'. It's not just the economists who are sceptical. Even Labor's union backers at the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union have been reported by the ABC as saying they don't want the Treasury to have a central role in Labor's economic plan because the Treasury has 'limited expertise'. So, while the Future Made in Australia Bill allows Labor to pick and choose who gets to benefit in a state commanded economy, small businesses and working individuals will ultimately be the biggest losers.</para>
<para>Australians deserve an economic policy that secures a future where small businesses can thrive and working individuals can prosper. The coalition will ensure that into the future, and we will do so by rejecting Labor's damaging policies and implementing sound economic principles that benefit all Australians. We won't revert to quick political stunts like handouts and empty slogans. We will advance a plan to get us back on track and back to basics.</para>
<para>We will start by reining in the crushing inflation that Labor has inflicted on the country through its reckless government spending. We will ensure affordable and reliable energy for businesses and households. We'll make Australia an attractive place to do business by cutting back the government intervention which is stifling entrepreneurship and suffocating the economy. We want to get out of the way of business, not in its way. We will allow small business to fairly compete without having to worry about market dominance by government funded corporations. We will champion critical industries such as mining, manufacturing and agriculture to be able to do business without overbearing regulation and red tape. We will promote healthy market competition, not the interests of lobbyists and the government's pet projects. We will ensure that every Australian has the ability to own a home and not be locked out of the housing market because of cost-of-living pressures. We will get back on track and back to basics. Labor might be scheming to solve the cost of living by throwing taxpayers' money around, but we will make it easier to do business, and we will lower taxes so hardworking Australians can keep more of what they earn. The Labor government's Future Made in Australia is a political stunt designed with the next election in mind, but our policies will be built upon sound economic principles that will set up this nation for success for generations.</para>
<para>Businesses around the country have been reaching out to local members saying how tough they're doing it. Just yesterday, I was stopped in the hallway by someone who was a big supporter of the government and the Labor Party and who told me that this bill will cripple them; this bill will not support them. How can this bill do what it claims to do, which is to make the future better in Australia, when it doesn't even look after the industries that we have here? I think that has reverberated around the country in all of our electorates. For that reason and many others, the coalition will not be supporting this bill.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILSON</name>
    <name.id>265970</name.id>
    <electorate>Fremantle</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The government believes that Australia's future should include Australian manufacturing, and we believe that Australia should shape its own future. I don't think either of those propositions is particularly surprising. I think those are propositions that would be broadly supported right across the Australian community. Australia should be a place that makes things. We have been in the past; we should be in the future. Australia should be a nation that can shape the way that we proceed into the 21st century, not have a different kind of future inflicted on us, not be at the mercy of inevitable change, and not miss out on opportunities or fall behind.</para>
<para>It is strange that those opposite say no to all of those things. It's strange that those opposite say no to Australian manufacturing and to Australia shaping its own future. They, in essence say no to the future. That's been a consistent theme of the opposition over the last two years. Their most consistent theme has been that they say no to everything. They certainly say no to Australian manufacturing. That's not a change in direction for the coalition, those opposite. In their nine years of government, they presided over the loss of 100,000 manufacturing jobs in Australia. They dared the Australian car industry to shut up shop and leave, and it did. They say no to Australian innovation and new business opportunities and jobs, and no to the investment that we need to sustain those things as part of how we move into and through a period of change. That would be disastrous for Australia. If Australia has ceased to have the capacity to make things and to take new opportunities to shape our future in the region in which we live, that would affect everyone's prosperity. It would affect households and businesses alike. Change is inevitable. Whether it's technological change, climate change, regional change or geopolitical change, change is inevitable. If we don't have the steady resolve to manage and embrace change, we will be left behind as the world moves on. We will see other countries succeed while we miss out. We'll find ourselves less prosperous, less secure and less sustainable.</para>
<para>This Future Made in Australia package—the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 and the Future Made in Australia (Omnibus Amendments No. 1) Bill 2024—is something we were very clear about when we came into government. It is something that the minister and Prime Minister have worked on, and it has two sensible priorities. The first is the net zero transformation stream, and the second is the economic resilience and security stream. Each has a strong and commonsense logic. They are also obviously related.</para>
<para>The world is changing, as energy systems change and as we deal with the risk and threats and costs of climate change. The move to a low-carbon economy—a net zero economy—is essential for our wellbeing. Making sure that, in that part of the economic and social transition, Australia is properly supported is a vital responsibility of government. The idea that we would abandon that, the idea that we would let Australia be buffeted by the winds of change, by the choices and interests of other nations rather than take charge of that process is, frankly, ridiculous. Needless to say, our own economic resilience and security is vital, and it's interesting that the other side—the coalition that likes to beat its chest when it comes to matters of national security—seems to take no interest in the challenges of making sure that we are, in fact, securing future when it comes to energy and when it comes to a number of other parts of our lives.</para>
<para>We believe that Australia should control its own future and that the best way of doing that is to make sure that we step up into and take advantage of the energy transformation and the net zero transformation that countries around the world are rightly focused on—and that we have a good, hard look at what it really means to be economically resilient and to have our own sovereign and self sufficient capacity in a range of areas. The pandemic was a reminder of how important that is. It was a reminder that there are tendencies sometimes in the way that we operate economically, as part of a global market, that don't necessarily put resilience and sovereign self-sufficiency high enough up the priority list. If you move towards a just-in-time inventory approach, you will find yourselves fragile and vulnerable to supply shocks—and we're still dealing with some of those.</para>
<para>Australia has an enormous amount to look forward to and to benefit from in terms of being a leader when it comes to decarbonisation, renewable energy storage and energy efficiency, and as we reflect on those lessons of the pandemic and the challenging nature of our geostrategic circumstances we are compelled to make sure we shape our future, rather than having the future shape us. We're going to achieve that by focusing on areas where we do have a competitive advantage and a comparative advantage. The member for Herbert was somehow suggesting that that won't be the focus of this program and this bill and the things it enables—of course it will. But, as other countries have shown, if you think that those comparative and competitive advantages will just naturally lead to the kinds of transition that we need to see—which are complex, which need to be coordinated and which depend to some degree on investment that comes from outside Australia—if you think that those things will just happen by themselves, you are kidding yourself. I don't really know why those opposite would think that. They tried that approach for nine years, of literally taking their hands off the wheel and letting it spin round and round, and we saw what occurred. We saw that in our energy system—we literally had a decrease of one gigawatt of generation capacity during that period because there was no focus or no imperative coming from those opposite to make sure that this country had what it needed.</para>
<para>There's talk from those opposite about picking winners, as if they question whether our country has any winners, whether we have any advantages. You can't talk about the importance of comparative advantage and competitive advantage without at least being prepared to see that we have some. We're blessed to have the best renewable energy resources in the world. We're blessed with an incredible range of critical minerals, with innovative and entrepreneurial businesses, with talented scientists and researchers, and an energised, highly educated population that should be unleashed. That potential should be unleashed in order for us to achieve our potential, which is among other things to be a renewable energy superpower. Nobody should think other countries are taking a different approach. The great home of free market, entrepreneurialism and technological development—the United States—has not introduced the Inflation Reduction Act and a number of other measures just for fun. They've introduced those measures because they want to make sure that the United States is at the cutting edge of the energy transformation of the net zero economy, and they want to make sure that they don't see a further drift out of manufacturing in that country with the consequences that it has for their resilience and their self-sufficiency. So if the United States is looking at doing that—and, of course, many other countries, especially throughout the OECD—why would we think that the best approach is to follow what those opposite did for nine years and literally take our hands off the wheel and do nothing? We're not going to take that approach. We believe Australia deserves to shape its own future.</para>
<para>We know that our businesses and our workers and their representatives are ready to be part of that, but they expect leadership from the government. They expect the government to do its bit. They expect that of government and our incredibly high quality Public Service, which those opposite seem to come up to the dispatch box or stand in their seats every day to denigrate as some kind of pastime. All of those parts of what makes Australia distinctively well placed in this time of challenge should be applied to our best interests, and that's what we're going to do.</para>
<para>We're going to make sure our investments unlock private investment at scale. That's what has happened through the Clean Energy Finance Corporation. I remember that, when I was first elected, one of the things of the then coalition government in the middle of 2016 was to once again try and get rid of the CEFC and ARENA, two things that the former Labor government established that have been enormously successful and have delivered a return to the Australian taxpayer while making sure that there is investment for the kind of change and innovation that every economy, including ours, needs.</para>
<para>We will achieve the change in the two streams I mentioned by applying community benefit principles. We want to promote safe and secure jobs. We want to deliver skills development and industrial capacity that is flexible and endures. The things that those opposite have put forward as their propositions for achieving a little bit of progress or momentum in these areas are almost the opposite of that. I've heard a number of speakers get up and say, 'Actually, what we need is to make sure'—they use tricky phrases like 'that wages are competitive' and 'that working conditions aren't unduly onerous or burdensome'. I think Australians see through that. They see through that kind of language. What the coalition is really saying is that they'd like to go back to their approach, which was stagnant or falling real wages and unfair working conditions. They say that that somehow is the one key dynamic element that will generate change. We don't see it that way. We're going to work towards the revitalisation of Australian manufacturing. We're going to make sure that Australia faces up to global challenges with optimism and energy and shapes them to our needs, but we're not going to do that by sacrificing the interests of the community, particularly the interests of workers.</para>
<para>I know that this is an approach very welcome in my community. I talked about comparative and competitive advantage. The truth is that the appetite for a future made in Australia, the energy and the entrepreneurialism exist right around our country and in businesses small, medium and large. What it asks for from people in this place is that we unlock and unleash that energy and that potential. In my electorate of Fremantle, we have one of two national shipbuilding precincts. I've got industrial precincts with an emphasis on the new energy economy, batteries, energy system innovation, the production of graphene, high-purity alumina and robotics—all of these things that Australia shouldn't keep telling itself that we can't be part of.</para>
<para>There are important national stories, but there can also be self-defeating stories. The idea that the era in which manufacturing did depend on relatively low-skilled labour, and quite a lot of it, has passed. We are not in that era and haven't been in that era for some time. If a country with the same population as Australia, 25-million-odd people, such as Taiwan, can go and be the leader in chip technology, why should Australia say to itself that all we can do is be a country that focuses on primary production and the earlier parts of the minerals and resources production process? We can do anything and everything. The moment that we acknowledge that—the moment that we actually make that an object of our national story—we begin to move down the path to making it real.</para>
<para>Those opposite, as I've said, are going to say no to this bill. That's not a surprise. I can't think that they've said yes to anything in the last two years. They say no to energy price relief, no to relief households and no to the responsible management of a budget that has delivered two surpluses after nine years in which there were eye-watering deficits as far as the eye can see, the tripling of the debt, the doubling of the debt before COVID occurred, unbelievable waste in programs like JobKeeper that blew $20 billion up against the wall on companies whose profits rose through the pandemic. There was every kind of bad governance that you could possibly imagine. Now that they're no longer sitting behind the wheel as it just spun aimlessly around, they say no to every single thing we do to try to clean up that mess, put Australia back on a sound budget position and guide Australia towards the future that Australians deserve: a high-quality future, an optimistic future, a future that does involve manufacturing, that does allow us to be a regional—in some cases, global—leader on the big challenges, on the net zero economy translation, on the energy transformation, on tackling climate change. That's what people want. That's what this government is delivering.</para>
<para>On the other side, it would be nice if one of these days the relentless negativity and the relentless hypocrisy made way for something else. I won't hold my breath. The Albanese Labor government is going to get on with guiding a future made in Australia.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr STEVENS</name>
    <name.id>176304</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak in favour of the shadow Treasurer's second reading amendment and commend his contribution on behalf of the coalition on the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 to the House. As he articulated, we indeed do not support this legislation whatsoever. It is completely against the DNA of the Liberal Party and, frankly, where modern Australia has been heading for decades and decades. From the government, this is all about politics. From memory, we saw the Prime Minister announce this policy just after the Dunkley by-election up in Brisbane in a speech about a future made in Australia. Whilst we're only debating this legislation in this chamber right now, the government has already been out there picking their winners and selecting businesses that are going to get special treatment and the largesse of the government if this legislation passes through the parliament.</para>
<para>Of course, the principles of the Liberal Party are very simple and very clear when it comes to the management of our economy. We want government to be as small as it can be; we want taxes to be as low as they possibly can; we want everyone to be on a level, equal playing field; we want businesses to be encouraged to take risks, to put their capital on the line; we want capital to go where the market determines that it should go, where the best ideas and the best opportunities within our economy are; and we want those businesses to be paying the lowest possible tax to give them the best chance to succeed. We don't want businesses to be making different decisions than they otherwise would have made because a government policy skews them, skews where the money flows, skews the benefit in the economy from one particular industry to another particular industry, from one particular business to another particular business, from one type of activity in the economy to another type of activity in the economy. What we have in this bill is exactly that: attempts to dramatically interfere with the sensible, natural market forces; natural, merit based decision-making; and the success and failure of good and bad ideas in a free market, capitalist economy. In the coalition we will defend those principles very strongly, very bitterly at every opportunity we get. The opportunity before us today is to speak against this bill and to seek to defeat this bill.</para>
<para>Ever since the Second World War, there has been an international consensus that there is a need to have open economies and open markets and that doing so not only leads to economic prosperity but also stops wars from happening, because a lot of the tensions that led to many of the conflicts in the preceding centuries, particularly the First and Second World Wars, were about locked-up markets, an inability of different economies to trade with and access other economies, and those economies having no interlinking whatsoever, so that, when tensions and pressures got to a certain point, the only course taken was that of warfare and bloodshed. The consensus that emerged at the end of the Second World War, particularly learning from the mistakes of the Treaty of Versailles after the First World War, was that we needed to have an international framework of open markets and low tariffs and let economies trade with other economies, produce what they were good at producing, sell the surplus of that produce because they were the best at making it, and, equally, import products that were more competitive from other economies.</para>
<para>Australia has been a great beneficiary of those fundamental principles, because our economic prosperity and success, as a nation of nearly 27 million people, come from exporting our surplus product. We have a trade surplus, beyond question. It is not disputed that we earn more money selling to other countries than we spend buying product from other countries, and there are not a lot of countries that can say that. For us, that's because industries, particularly in the resources sector and the agricultural sector, produce an enormous surplus and sell that into other economies, and they have benefited from the fact that we have an international trading regime that has brought tariffs down in the decades since the GATT and, more recently, the WTO frameworks were put in place. People can invest with confidence in our competitive advantages in our own economy, and they can sell that surplus to great profit.</para>
<para>I am, frankly, concerned about what other countries are doing, which the government is citing as examples to be followed, because we're going backwards on the metric of open, free markets. Now we have a variety of economies around the world saying, 'Let's get back into subsidisation, protectionism, government interference and government intervention in economies.' It is a very dangerous path to go down. If we've learnt nothing from history about what that leads to, I deeply lament that, because we know where we will end up. For Australia in particular, which has a massive trade surplus, the consequence of our participating in and encouraging a return to dramatic protectionism and trade barriers is going to be a collapse in our standard of living in this country.</para>
<para>When the Treasurer handed down the budget, it became clearer and clearer that this policy is all about politics and the next election. The best example of that is that in the appropriation for this policy is a $45 million taxpayer advertising campaign. If this is a great set of policies and a great idea for the nation, why is it that the government has to spend $45 million on an advertising campaign to tell people that it's great? I might add that the key measures in this bill are not ones that involve consumers having to make any decisions or do anything at all. Why would you have to have a television ad in the middle of the AFL Grand Final talking about the Future Made in Australia when everything to do with this suite of policies involves industry and business decision-making? Why would anyone need to learn about that when they're watching the television after getting home from work? The only reason is that the government are using this to try and look like they have an economic agenda and a plan for the future of our economy. It is very regrettable that such a spectacular amount of taxpayer resources is being put on the line through this legislation, purely to try and concoct an argument and create the mirage that there is an economic agenda underpinning what this government is doing.</para>
<para>The facts and the reality are very much the reverse. Australians have never done it tougher. They have never found it more difficult to make the household budget ends meet, and people are making difficult decisions and sacrifices because their mortgages, rents and power bills are going up. That's not just happening to Australian families; it's happening to Australian businesses. This government has a policy to pick winners and dole out taxpayer funds to particular businesses. If you say to a business, 'We'd love to give you tens of millions of dollars,' they will take it. Of course they will. They will probably also agree to be at a press conference, put a hard hat and a high-vis vest on you, stand next to you and say, 'This is a fantastic policy for my business.' It's no surprise that the businesses getting millions of dollars through this program would say that it's a good thing.</para>
<para>People that are interested in the broader economy—like, I don't know, the Productivity Commission, helmed by someone appointed by this government; and senior, significant, respected economists—have a very different view. They have the same concerns that I've just outlined, about a government that is using taxpayer funds to pick winners, concoct press conferences and run television ads in the lead-up to an election. The consequence is that the money that is being spent on this program is coming out of the pockets of Australian families and off the P&L of Australian businesses. Every dollar, let alone the billions of dollars in this program, that is spent on picking winners means that taxes have to be higher for everyone else.</para>
<para>There are not many economists or economy-wide industry groups that will tell you that, as it is, it's easy to meet the high costs of doing business in this country. That's not just taxes. It includes taxes, but it's all the other inputs that businesses have to face: power bills, payroll taxes and local government charges. All the different costs of doing business are very significant in this country. If you wanted to help manufacturers, and you asked a fair spread of manufacturers what we could do to help them, they would say: 'Try and get our costs down. Help us get our costs down.' An individual manufacturing business might say, 'Yes, I'm more than happy to take tens of millions of dollars from you if you want to give it to me,' but, if you put all the businesses together, who are obviously not collectively getting tens of billions of dollars, they will say: 'Can you cut my power bill for me? Can you help get other input costs down?'</para>
<para>We're out there competing against economies with much lower electricity charges. I worked in a manufacturing business for a long time. We had one plant in Adelaide and a replica plant doing exactly the same thing in Suzhou, China. We were running the exact same business in two jurisdictions, and the input costs were the difference. As much as labour costs in other countries are, of course, always going to be lower than in Australia—and we're not seeking to dispute the excellent higher living standards and higher real wages in this country—power bills shouldn't be any more expensive in Australia than for our major competitors. When you're competing in manufacturing and your major input is your power bill, why don't we do something about getting power prices down in this country? The opposite is occurring. This bill, and the expenditure of billions of dollars on this 'picking winners' strategy to try and convince people in the lead-up to the election that there is an economic plan, pales into insignificance if there were an actual plan from this government to help get business costs down like electricity generation.</para>
<para>There are fundamental principles at stake here. I've talked about the position of the coalition. Obviously the government is bringing forward something that is against the DNA of our party. There is an opportunity for members in this chamber to reflect deeply on going down this path. What we're doing is supporting those that are already going down this path and encouraging our major competitors to do the same thing. This is us contributing to a global trend to re-protect and to put barriers and walls back around economies across the planet. Looking at the ABS statistics on trade: effectively, if you want to measure the impact on the Australian economy of that, just remove our trade surplus completely from our current GDP, and from the living standards that that currently supports for every single Australian.</para>
<para>I know the government don't want to bring back protectionism. I acknowledge the Hawke and Keating governments' work on recognising and understanding the benefit to Australia and our economy in getting rid of trade barriers rather than bringing them back. But once we get into the business of doling out big licks of taxpayer funds to the businesses that we like and that we want to help compete against other businesses, there will only be retaliation against that. We won't be the winners of that. The end of that cycle just means a reduction in global trade. As a nation of 27 million people, we are absolutely dependent on producing more in this country than we consume and selling the surplus to other nations to grow and expand our wealth. There was a consensus on those fundamental principles from both major parties thanks to the changes that Hawke and Keating achieved within their own party's attitudes to those things. Now we have a situation through this bill where one of the two major parties is reversing their position on the open markets, free trade and global competition that has a demonstrated record of success for the Australian economy. I urge the House to defeat this bill.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr FREELANDER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
    <electorate>Macarthur</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I applaud— <inline font-style="italic">(Quorum formed)</inline>I get to my feet very positively supporting the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024. It really is a wonderful statement providing a wonderful process by which this government will support Australian manufacturing, which I have to say is thriving in my electorate of Macarthur—which is, by population, the biggest electorate in the country. The many people who live in Macarthur need high-paying, well-qualified jobs, which are what this bill will promote.</para>
<para>We are very excitedly looking forward to the opening of Western Sydney Airport, which is just to the north of my electorate. It's actually in the electorate of Werriwa, which borders Macarthur. The Western Sydney Airport will be the most modern and most high-tech airport in Australia, and one of the best in the world. My eldest son is the lead engineer on the rail project that is delivering public transport to the airport, and I'm very excited about it, as are the many people in my electorate, who will have very high-tech, well-paying and very satisfying jobs in the businesses that are already springing up around it. It is a signature policy of the Albanese Labor government and I support it 100 per cent.</para>
<para>All I've heard from the other side is negativity, some very stilted views of Australian history, and no policies. They had a decade of watching our manufacturing industry decay. They'd previously allowed one of our biggest manufacturing industries, the motor vehicle industry, to leave Australia. They shut it down, and they had no view of the future. Unfortunately, 20 years later there is no difference. All we get from the opposition is negativity, no policy and no view of the future.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Dr FREELANDER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>That's exactly right. They just want to dig things out of the ground, grow things on the land and export it. They don't understand the importance of manufacturing and sovereign capability in our country.</para>
<para>I'm the proud member for Macarthur and I've had the privilege to visit and see some of the incredible work of the over 650 manufacturing companies in my electorate. They range from construction manufacturing, defence industry and high-tech printing. In my electorate, we have the wonderful DECO group at Minto, which produces the non-flammable coatings that you see on buildings, which are really taking over from imported products. They can do wonderful powder coating, they do wood panelling and they do anything you want coated onto metal or other products for industries including the medical manufacturing industry, the construction industry, all different industries. DECO is led by the amazing Ross Doonan, who is a manufacturing engineer producing his own robotic equipment in Macarthur for his business, which is rapidly expanding. Interestingly, in an industry that is traditionally a high energy user, over 60 per cent of DECO's power is now renewable energy thanks to the renewable energy project Ross has done on his own factories. It is amazing to see and it gives me huge hope for the future.</para>
<para>There are a whole range of other businesses, like the Platt company, producing for the defence industry, and Noumi, the company that now produces different forms of milk—almond milk, soya milk, all those things—in a high-tech factory in Ingleburn which I've visited several times. I am impressed with the manufacturers of Macarthur. I really see the quality of the products being produced in Macarthur and I'm continuously impressed.</para>
<para>I'm not the only member of this House of course who can say they are proud that they know that there's Australian manufacturing in their electorate, and we are seeing this renaissance around the country supported by the government with policies like the Future Made in Australia Bill, as well as our commitment to renewable energy. As well as being chair of the Health, Aged Care and Sport Committee, I'm also on the Agriculture Committee and I've had the benefit of visiting many innovative industries in agriculture around the country that are using new technologies to produce food and other agricultural crops without the use of pesticides or the high use of fertilisers. That is all for export and all making the lives of Australians better.</para>
<para>Obviously my first and main interest is in the health industry, and I have seen some absolutely amazing things. One thing in particular, which I've seen several times, even though their present manufacturing hub is not in my electorate, is Cochlear. They have their manufacturing plant in Australia in the electorate of Bennelong, which is Jerome Laxale's electorate. When you visit their factory, you cannot help but be impressed by the quality of the workers and the quality of the things that they produce there with cochlear implants. Professor Graeme Clark, who developed the cochlear implant, grew up in my electorate of Macarthur. It is incredible to think that his vision and his foresight have led to a company like Cochlear. To visit their plant is amazing. They have other manufacturing plants around the world, but their highest quality and most modern technology is produced in the Australian plant in the electorate of Bennelong and is exported all over the world. It is just so impressive to see. They have a huge research group that is looking at further advances in things like bionic eyes and other high-tech medical developments. As an Australian I'm very proud of what they can do.</para>
<para>Another fantastic Australian medical company is ResMed. ResMed was developed through the efforts of Professor Colin Sullivan at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital in Sydney. I knew him as a young resident and a medical student. Because of his developments in sleep and sleep technology, we now have another fantastic Australian company. ResMed produces in Sydney, but some of its products are also developed and produced in my electorate of Macarthur, particularly through the DECO Group. They are another fantastic Australian medical manufacturing company that this government is supporting. We'll continue to support innovative companies like this through the Future Made in Australia program. It's not about picking winners; it's about giving companies the ability to develop their products in Australia for Australian use and for export.</para>
<para>We learnt in the pandemic that, if we let our manufacturing industry continue to run down, we run the risk of not having products that we use every day in health and agriculture et cetera. So it is important that we have that sovereign manufacturing capability. Because we have lost the ability to manufacture many things in Australia, we've lost the ability to produce a lot of the pharmaceuticals which we are using every day. In my time as a medical student, Australia produced its own antibiotics. We no longer produce the really high-level antibiotics that we use in our hospitals; we rely on imports. We need to reverse that. There are already shortages that have developed over the last five years, and it is very important that we develop sovereign pharmaceutical manufacturing, and Future Made in Australia will help support that. It will give companies the confidence to invest.</para>
<para>That includes companies like Moderna, which is developing an RNA vaccine manufacturing plant in Melbourne. It is important that the government supports these things, not only for our sovereign manufacturing and the fact that we need these things in Australia but for the fact that we can now export overseas. Many international companies like Moderna are learning that, with the philosophy of this government and the policies this government is putting in place, they can invest in Australia confidently, knowing they have a government that will support their efforts not just to produce in Australia but to produce things for export all around the world. There are many examples of innovative companies which have changed the lives of many Australians and many people overseas. Our near neighbours are huge, with high populations, and they are going to want the high-tech products that our manufacturers can produce.</para>
<para>I am very optimistic about our future. I know that my children and my grandchildren will have positive futures because of government policies that encourage manufacturing in and exports from Australia. I have no hesitancy in standing here and speaking about the Future Made in Australia Bill, because that gives me confidence, not just for myself but for my children, my grandchildren and future generations. We are a country that is resilient. We have many inventors. Unfortunately, over decades, we've lost the ability to support them by manufacturing in Australia. We now have an opportunity to compete on a global scale in the global economy, particularly in things like our transition to net zero.</para>
<para>This bill steps out how we will put the discipline and the rigour established in the Future Made in Australia Bill into practice by expanding the roles of Export Finance Australia and the Australian Renewable Energy Agency. I'm very excited about it. I'm very positive about this bill. We have a government that at last sponsors manufacturing and is doing its best to prepare Australia and future generations for a prosperous future.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUCHHOLZ</name>
    <name.id>230531</name.id>
    <electorate>Wright</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to make a small contribution to the debate on the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 and try and just outline, in the simplest terms I possibly can, why we will be opposing this bill. We hear those from the government come in and say that members of the coalition are opposing this because we don't believe in a future made in Australia. Well, that's simply not true.</para>
<para>I want to give, primarily, a shout-out to those manufacturers here in Australia who are doing amazing things for our country, providing the services and the products that we need and, in some cases, exporting them all around the world. I want to share with you some of the comments I hear when I talk to the Australian manufacturers about what we could do if we were to redeploy those $22.7 billion earmarked in this bill, the second largest budget item of this government's spending. I want to share with you what they would prefer to see happen instead of this bill.</para>
<para>Both sides of the House are equally committed to making sure that we have long-term manufacturing capability in this country, because it does give us sovereign capability and it does give us security into the future. Both sides of this House have an enthusiasm to make sure Australia can manufacture products into the future, but we have basically fundamental differences in the approach and how we should get there. Hopefully, at the end of this brief contribution, that will become clearer.</para>
<para>To start my contribution and to give you a sense of how those on this side of the House think: we predominantly think like businesspeople and manufacturers because, for all intents and purposes, those on this side of the House do come from a small-business or manufacturing background, did employ people and did make contributions to our nation. I myself, after my banking career in agri-finance, started a small transport express courier company. I had 14 depots around the state of Queensland and employed over 100 permanent staff and contractors, of which I'm very proud. The member for Leichhardt, behind me, was a prominent pastoralist in northern Australia. He had a crocodile farm, and his business was one of the first Australian businesses to start exporting crocodile skins to a little-known company called Louis Vuitton.</para>
<para>The stories of our comprehensive understanding of the needs of businesses and manufacturers in this country are endless on this side of the House because we are them. We are those businesses. There are exceptions on the other side of the House, where there are some who come from a small-business background, and to them I say, 'Hurrah!' But the vast majority of those on the other side are in this House as a result of a relationship that they have with the union movement. And there's nothing wrong with that; it's just a point of difference. But when we stand here and try to make a point around a future made in Australia, those listening should not believe for one minute that the coalition is not committed to a greater Australia and a greater manufacturing capability.</para>
<para>I take everyone's minds back to nearly half a century ago, to a small village then called Gladstone in Central Queensland—it's a port city. It was built predominantly by the Bjelke-Petersen era on the back of an emerging coal industry, where the government of the day borrowed money from the Japanese government to develop the mines in partnership with them and build a railway line. We can look at the mega-manufacturers—our aluminium capability, our powerhouse capability, our steel manufacturing—through that one postcode, and we can look at what fundamental settings needed to be in place for that community to strengthen and to grow and to prosper over many decades. Fundamentally, like any small business, the same as large business, we cannot—like the member for Sturt rightly pointed out—be in pursuance of low wages of international competitors such as China because we just cannot match that low-rate input cost. But there are other input costs, that in we can address in this room through our fiscal settings that will return that competitive pendulum back towards us on a global stage. Sadly, those are missing from within the contents of this bill—such as lowering our company tax rate.</para>
<para>Everyone in Australia remembers the commitment made on several occasions by this Prime Minister before the election: 'My word is my bond when it comes to the implementation of stage 3 tax cuts. My word is my bond.' It doesn't get any more concrete than that. But as soon as they got in, they crab-marched away from it. They had done a couple of polls. It's like a Robin Hood tale: they took money away from those who make these very contributions—the manufacturers and those on higher wages—and gave greater tax cuts similar to that of stage 1 and 2 to low- and middle-income people.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUCHHOLZ</name>
    <name.id>230531</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm just pointing out the differences in our tax policies. We seek in this nation to provide a lower tax competitive rate so we don't have our 108,000 manufacturers in this country seeking to move offshore. Why would you manufacture here in Australia, where this bill and government do nothing to reduce our company tax rate, when you could be going up to Singapore and paying around eight to 10 per cent, or any other jurisdiction where it's lower. In America at the moment, they're hungry for investment through their IRA investment footprint. Some economists have said that this is a very poor imitation of that policy, and it has been belittled and bemoaned by economists. I'd only be reading from my speaking points to enter that into <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline>—I'm sure they're already there.</para>
<para>We've heard those on the other side make the contribution about our Australian manufacturing that we hounded and dared the motor companies in Australia to leave the country. I just remind those in the chamber that, whilst I was a great supporter and still am of both Ford and Holden, at the time they exited the Australian motor market, they were respectively No. 13 and 11 on the top car sales in Australia. Those on the other side of the chamber would make the argument that we dared them to leave the country. Hockey, the then Treasurer, said that. We have those conversations about: 'Why aren't you doing more to support the car industry? What type of car were you driving?' The top five cars were either made in Japan in the country or Korea with the Hyundai Accent or the Mazda. The reality is that the Australian market had changed its appetite from the large six-cylinder vehicle to something more practical in Australia, and the large manufacturing companies failed to accommodate those changes.</para>
<para>This is going to be a failed bill. It'll get through the House, but whilst the intent is noble, wanting to secure a future made in Australia, it's fundamentally flawed because it picks winners over other winners—for example, within the green hydrogen space. Hydrogen is for all intents and purposes the vehicle that is going to fill the energy void between renewables as coal exits the market, but we don't know how much it's going to cost. Deputy Speaker Georganas, you'd be well aware of committees in this place that have travelled the country looking at green energy substitutes. Actually, no, we're on a different committee. Other committees have travelled the country looking at such. If this Future Made in Australia Bill was fair dinkum, it would have included all of the hydrogens—the grey hydrogen, the blue hydrogen and the pink hydrogen—rather than just the green hydrogen. When you look at the hydrogen industry in its complete state, you can pick the winners out of those, and then green hydrogen will float to the top. Without a doubt, it's the most expensive.</para>
<para>We're not prepared to inflict additional costs onto the Australian taxpayer that already exist as a result of the fiscal settings of this government. Under this government, there have been 12 progressive interest rate rises. For those with mortgages, the pressure on households lies squarely at the feet of the inept mismanagement of inflationary pressures. I'd also like to put into <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline>,since this government has come to office, the no less than 19,000 businesses that have ended in insolvency since Labor came to office. How is it that 19,000 businesses in Australia have entered into insolvency, the highest on record since the Australian Securities and Investments Commission began collecting data? It's because of the input costs that are being asked of businesses. When you transfer those input costs to those manufacturers here in Australia, they are all looking for cheaper energy.</para>
<para>So, as our coal mines, who provide the cheapest baseload power at the moment, look to access this Future Made in Australia Bill funding of $22.7 billion, they're precluded from doing so. It's that picking of winners—I'm not going to say pork-barrelling—that this bill has done that precludes the real essence of what we should be looking for in this country, and that is to give every Australian manufacturer the opportunity to access this, not just those friends that may share the same political ideologies of this government. If they were fair dinkum about a future made in Australia, they'd be sitting down with the manufacturing sector representatives of the 108,000 manufacturers here in Australia, and I sing their praise.</para>
<para>When I was the assistant minister for transport, PACCAR, at Bayswater in Victoria, were manufacturing Kenworths and assembling DAF trucks. They're little known to most Australians. I sing the praise of Mack and Volvo, manufacturing right here in Australia, at Wacol in Brisbane. Do you know how many government subsidies both of those companies put their hands up for? None. That's in contrast to the many billions we subsidise the car industry.</para>
<para>I say well done to the Australian manufacturers persisting in an environment where insolvency rates are through the roof. I say to you: the coalition is committed to reform. The coalition is committed to getting the government out of your way. The coalition government is committed to lower taxes and lower input costs to make Australia an attractive place to invest in and employ people. We cannot compete on low wages like our input partners out of China and other small countries, so we need a competitive difference, and that has to come through other line items on our expenditure balance sheet. But I acknowledge our manufacturers. I praise them. Continue to make a contribution to Australia, and hopefully at the next election, we will be back supporting you in the hardest way we can.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELYEA</name>
    <name.id>309484</name.id>
    <electorate>Dunkley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I am pleased to speak on the Future Made in Australia Bill. I have noticed that many members in this place have contributed by speaking on this bill. I thought I'd better not miss my opportunity, considering south-east Melbourne is one of Australia's largest manufacturing regions, with more manufacturing jobs than greater Adelaide and Western Sydney. A future made in Australia is simple. It's all about an economic plan for a more secure and independent future for Australia.</para>
<para>Australia sits before a unique opportunity. There is a global transition afoot to net zero. Australia must take an active role in this transition, not just for the economic benefit of our nation but because it's in our national interest to do so. Australia is well placed to play a key role in the decarbonisation of economies. We have advantages in the development of renewable energy technologies, vast reserves of minerals required for the construction of these technologies, an abundance of sea, wind and scorching sun, and highly skilled labour that can slot in to meet these manufacturing capabilities.</para>
<para>The changing geostrategic landscape has also meant we must have sovereignty over manufacturing. Our supply chains are under extreme pressure due to global conflict, increasing fragmentation and global competition. Over the last few years, COVID, war and geopolitical tensions have shown there is an undeniable, compelling reason to have more control over the industries important to Australia.</para>
<para>As I stated before, the transition to net zero can have great economic and industrial benefits for Australia. The Albanese Labor government's Future Made in Australia will unlock private investment in these future industries, create jobs across the country, and build a stronger and more resilient economy powered by renewable energy. It recognises our future growth prospects lie here in our great nation—a nation that has the industrial capacity, resources, skills and energy to make us into a globally attractive investment destination.</para>
<para>Yes, private sector is responding to these opportunities, but there is also a role for government in this transitionary process. I would go as far to say that government must have a role in providing economic incentives due to the broader national interests at play. These incentives will assist Australia to take up the opportunities created by our trade partners and comparative advantages to other countries. It will enable Australia to capitalise on opportunities in areas like critical minerals, processing, green metals, clean energy technologies and low-carbon liquid fuels.</para>
<para>If I may, I might go briefly into some of the details of the bill. The bill will codify a National Interest Framework. This is much needed and will help to better align economic incentives with the national interests of Australia. Legislating the framework will provide certainty to the investment community, which is critical to attracting private funding at scale. There'll be two streams of the framework: the net zero transformation stream and the economic resilience and security stream, essentially just covering sectors that could have a sustained comparative advantage in a net-zero global economy and the sectors where some level of domestic capability is a necessity.</para>
<para>I note also the set of community benefit principles will be applied to the Future Made in Australia. The bill will ensure that the Future Made in Australia has a mechanism that can be used to implement the community benefit principles as required. This will go to ensuring that investments develop secure jobs that are not only safe but also have good conditions and pay; that they boost more skilled and inclusive workforces by investing in skills development and giving people opportunities for broader workforce participation; that they engage collaboratively with and achieve positive outcomes for local communities, such as First Nations communities and communities directly affected by the transition to net zero; that they strengthen domestic industrial capabilities including through stronger local supply chains; and that they demonstrate transparency and compliance in relation to the management of tax affairs, including benefits received under Future Made in Australia supports.</para>
<para>The Future Made in Australia is also supported by other Labor government initiatives, including fee-free TAFE. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the South East Melbourne Manufacturers Alliance, the peak industry association made up of 230 companies in south-east Melbourne. They provide a strong, clear voice for manufacturers in our region. SEMMA and its board members and organisations are working hard to maintain the south-east as the premier manufacturing region in Australia. We need organisations like SEMMA, with strategies to guide the work and vision of a future made in Australia.</para>
<para>A future made in Australia is quite simple and, frankly, deserving of support from every member in this House if we wish to have a country that has sovereignty and is able to support our own needs in the community. We all want Australia to be a country that makes things here. We'll put the talents of our people and our incredible natural resources to work by making things here, instead of just importing our own things all the time. We can manufacture more solar panels with the minerals from the country and not just ship off the minerals to other countries.</para>
<para>Under Labor, we're generating 25 per cent more renewable energy, and we've ticked off enough renewable projects to power three million homes. This is a significant achievement already. The Future Made in Australia will boost more projects like these, powering us forward into a net-zero economy. This is good for our economy, good for jobs, good for our sovereignty and good for the nation, making Australia wealthier and more secure against global forces and pandemics. A stronger economy made right here—a future made in Australia.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:04</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 in opposition to Labor's Future Made in Australia Bill 2024. There is nothing wrong with industry policy. The question before the House is whether the policy put forward by the Albanese government is good policy or bad policy, and I stand here today to assert that it is bad public policy. In fact, the Future Made in Australia Bill is a vile ruse. It's trickery, it's deceitful and it will not achieve what Labor purports it to be able to achieve. We always have to remember, when it comes to this Albanese government, not to take them at their word, because that word gets broken time and time again. Don't listen to what they say, but look at what they do. This bill reflects the depth of cynicism to which this government is prepared to go.</para>
<para>Let's take the very phrasing of 'Made in Australia'. This is a cynical misuse of a brand that has been built over decades on the part of Australia. Personally, I spent much of my 20-plus years in business in overseas markets ahead of coming to this place. I know firsthand how men and women of Australia have built the Made in Australia brand in international markets. They have sweated. Many of them have lost their shirt trying to get deals over the line, but what they always had was the pride in Made in Australia. Indeed, there are companies today who are going through the process with government so they can use the label Made in Australia on their own products. We have legislated in this very parliament how that must be done. Despite having that Made in Australia brand built over many years by team Australia—successive governments of all stripes, the private sector, the men and women of this country—the Albanese Labor government has decided to steal that brand for themselves. They are taking that brand from team Australia and giving it to team Labor in this belief that they will con the Australian people. It's a vile ruse. It's trickery. It is deceitful.</para>
<para>People might say, 'Yeah, but what's in the title?' The title goes to the heart, the cynicism of this government. If you look at the detail, you will see the Treasurer entered this parliament to table this law and made very grand comments about how any funding going from the federal government to a sector of the economy or to a project must 'apply to strict policy frameworks'. Gee, that sounds good. Think about that: 'strict policy frameworks'. It sounds even better when you go to what those frameworks are.</para>
<para>The first criteria in the National Interest Framework is:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Australian industry is expected to have a sustained comparative advantage in a net zero global economy …</para></quote>
<para>So, in order for a sector of the economy to be prioritised to get government money, it has to have a sustained comparative advantage. That is criteria No. 1. It sounds good. Anyone who has studied economics understands that comparative advantage is one of those foundational principles. It's David Ricardo stuff from the early 1800s. So that's great—tick. Sounds good.</para>
<para>What has this government done? The first project it announces under this scheme is for $1 billion to manufacture solar panels. Think about that. Is there a problem with using solar energy? No. Is there a problem with solar panels? No. But, if this government were true to what its framework suggests, then it would have to be an area of comparative advantage. Australia does not have a comparative advantage in the manufacture of solar panels.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Husic</name>
    <name.id>91219</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>These are different solar panels.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TED O'BRIEN</name>
    <name.id>138932</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'll take the interjection from the minister at the table. He now thinks that Australia does things—what—relative to China and relative to the main producers around the world? There is no manufacturing. This is the problem with this government. Even the industry minister thinks that suddenly Australia actually has an opportunity cost advantage over China on solar panels. This is the cluelessness of this government, but I don't think it's cluelessness. I don't even give him the benefit of the doubt of not knowing what he's talking about. I actually think it's deceitful. I think it's all part of the vile ruse of the Labor Party.</para>
<para>Here they talk about comparative advantage of a nation, and their first announcement is actually about something that China has the full advantage in. Even this industry minister does not know that, or is he, like his colleagues, being deceitful because he knows Australia does not have a comparative advantage on the manufacturing of solar panels relative to other countries? That's what a comparative advantage is.</para>
<para>Why don't we go to quantum computing? That was their second announcement. Who are the beneficiaries of this? Is it really a company that is Australian, or is it an American one? It's an American one. So how about that? The first two announcements actually don't even go to Australia's comparative advantage, and the industry minister here, which I think is quite funny, actually thinks all of these are an advantage. I don't know; what's the third biggest advantage, Minister?</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Husic</name>
    <name.id>91219</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Quantum computing.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TED O'BRIEN</name>
    <name.id>138932</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>No, that was your second. He doesn't even have a third, so there you go.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! All remarks will be through the chair.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TED O'BRIEN</name>
    <name.id>138932</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Members of parliament, this minister believes solar panels and quantum computing are our comparative advantage.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The member for Fairfax will resume his seat. The member for Macarthur, on a point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Dr Freelander</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The shadow minister is somehow regaling the minister and other members of parliament, not addressing himself through the chair at all. It was quite hysterical. He surely is out of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Macarthur will resume his seat. I've raised that with the member for Fairfax—that all comments must be through this chair. I'll ask people on the other side to stop interjecting. This is the chamber; it's not a playground. The member for Fairfax has the call.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TED O'BRIEN</name>
    <name.id>138932</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Through you, I refer to this minister, and I refer to all of the members on the other side of this parliament, the government, because this is a vile ruse, a deceit of the Australian people. Let's go to criteria No. 2 in their National Interest Framework. It says:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Public investment is needed for the sector to make a significant contribution to emissions reduction at an efficient cost.</para></quote>
<para>That sounds good. Yet again, it sounds great. But don't listen to what they say; look at what they do.</para>
<para>It has since been confirmed that technologies recognised around the world and resources recognised around the world to reduce emissions, to achieve net zero, are excluded by this government, by this policy. So is CCS, carbon capture and storage, included? No, it's not. Ideologically, they disagree with it. Blue hydrogen? 'No, we don't want that either,' says the Albanese government, 'let alone uranium and nuclear technology. There's not a chance in the world.' This again contradicts their own National Interest Framework, which is why you have to look at what they do and not at what they say.</para>
<para>We also know that, once you look at the detail of the flow of money coming through this policy, there is $3.9 billion unaccounted for and it is not stated on what that will be spent. But here's what we do know: that nearly $4 billion will be used, or at least announced, over the next 12 months—in an election year. This is a cynical slush fund from the Albanese Labor government to try to set them up for an election. Here they are, coming in with all the motherhood statements of 'made in Australia'. This is made for the Labor Party. This is made for their election campaign. There is $3.9 billion. I invite any member of the Labor Party who is prepared to come into this House, including the minister at the table, to clarify what that $3.9 billion is going to be used for. But they will not say so, because it's a slush fund. This is not about team Australia. This is about team Labor and this is why it is cynical. It's a vile ruse. Don't listen to what they say. Look at what they do. It is typical Labor big government. They pick winners. But, when you have a bunch of losers trying to pick winners in the marketplace, it's the Australian people who will always pay. That's been the case to date with this Albanese government and it will continue to be the case if this so-called Future Made in Australia Bill passes this House.</para>
<para>What this really is is an attempt to mop up failure in policy. I would love an extension of time if the minister would allow me because I'd like to go through the failures in his policy. But let me focus on the policy for which I am shadow minister. That is climate change and energy. Such is the failure of this government that we have seen a tripling of insolvencies in the manufacturing sector since it came to office. The feedback from the manufacturing sector is that one of their key problems is the cost of energy. This government, including this minister and other members of Labor in this House, looked the Australian people in the eye and promised them a $275 reduction in household power bills. They promised $275 coming off household bills. Today there are areas of Australia where households are paying up to $1,000 more than what Labor had promised.</para>
<para>But the impact on business, especially on manufacturing, is far more long term because we have manufacturers closing down. We have major energy-intensive manufacturers looking to relocate to the likes of China and India. Is that a criticism of China and India? No. But why are they relocating? Energy prices are too high in Australia. Why are energy prices too high? It's a direct consequence of government policy. Why is government wanting to increase the cost of energy? Because it's coming from technologies they don't like, especially coal and gas. So work this one out. The policy settings of this government are all about reducing emissions, so they're bumping up the cost of energy, which is what is happening, and the companies that get stung go to China and India. In the manufacturing sector alone, emissions from those countries are three to four times what they are in Australia. So they are in fact making emissions worse globally through the policies they are introducing. That's before you even talk about the collapse of industry, the shedding of jobs and the fact that regional communities are becoming weaker and poorer as a direct consequence of this government.</para>
<para>What's the relevance here to the Future Made in Australia? The relevance is that the pork-barrelling which is going to be going on through this policy will be doubling down on those same failed energy policies. They know full well that the 82 per cent renewable target by 2030 is an unmitigated disaster. It won't be achieved. It's driving prices up. And industry knows that. The government knows that because industry tells them. So what's their solution? They double down on it and introduce the so-called Future Made in Australia Bill when, in truth, it is going to lead to the closure of industry. It would be more honestly rephrased as a 'future made in China'. That is the fact of this bill.</para>
<para>Can I again say, in closure: do not listen to what the Labor Party say; look at what they do. This policy is nothing but a vile ruse to help the Labor Party—certainly not 'team Australia'.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RYAN</name>
    <name.id>249224</name.id>
    <electorate>Lalor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's hard to believe I left my office, where I was listening to former president Barack Obama make an inspiring speech about hope, to come in here to listen to a shadow minister make a less-than-inspiring speech, following many others from those opposite. They drive down hope. Speaker after speaker from that side, when speaking on this piece of legislation, is showing Australians what they are really about. They don't trust Australians. They don't believe Australians can do things. What they're demonstrating is that they don't believe Australians can make things. After 10 years in government, driving manufacturing out of our suburbs, out of our regions and out of our country, they come in here to criticise a piece of legislation—the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024—that is deliberately made to build hope in our suburbs and our regions—legislation about a future made in Australia and about the return of manufacturing.</para>
<para>I remember the dark days of the pandemic. I remember lots and lots of planning and talking about sovereign capability. There were lots of woeful moments where we realised that we were at the bottom of the supply chain and we couldn't get our hands on things that we needed in this country. I was listening yesterday to people on the other side who talked about increased costs of housing, without factoring into that the shortages of things that we need to build things in this country because we are at the bottom of the supply chain and, for decades, we have allowed ourselves to not build, create or make the things we need here to ensure we are safe in dangerous times.</para>
<para>This piece of legislation is about just that. It's about building hope. It's about building things. It's about Australia returning to a place of sovereign capability. It's about Australia returning to being a country that actually believes in its people and believes its people can innovate, can create and can make things here. For two days now, I've seen those opposite walk through the door and come in here, and I've listened to them making speeches about this legislation, and they need to understand that all I hear is their absolute lack of faith in the Australian population to do the things we need to do.</para>
<para>Unlike those opposite, we believe in Australians. We believe in our capacity to innovate. We believe in our capacity to get things done. We believe in our capacity to collaborate, most importantly. We believe in our capacity to collect around an idea and to make things happen, and that's what this legislation is about. It is about a plan for a future made in Australia. It is very simple. We want Australia to be a country that makes more things here because it will grow our economy and create good jobs. That's what drives us. It means we'll be a country standing on our own two feet and spreading opportunity. It means that we'll be making the most of what we have and making more things here. It means that we will be more than a farm and more than a quarry. As the member for Macarthur said earlier, those opposite are quite happy to dig things out of the ground, but they don't have the faith, the drive or the energy to believe we can value-add to those minerals and create new markets. We just heard from the member for Fairfax, who doesn't believe that we can compete.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Ted O'Brien</name>
    <name.id>138932</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Not with cheap energy, you can't.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RYAN</name>
    <name.id>249224</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>He doesn't believe that we can compete on the international stage. He doesn't believe that we can do it.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The member for Fairfax has had his go.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RYAN</name>
    <name.id>249224</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I heard him say it. It came out of his mouth. He doesn't believe that we have a competitive advantage, he doesn't believe in Australian ingenuity and he doesn't believe in Australian capacity. That's what I heard the member opposite say, and it's a litany of members opposite saying just that. Day in, day out this week, that's what we've heard. They don't believe in Australian ingenuity. They don't believe in our workforce's capacity. They do not believe that we can do things here. They believed that we needed to close down car manufacturing in this country. They believed we had to close it down, stood in this chamber and dared General Motors to leave, knowing full well that, if General Motors closed down in Australia, it would be the death of the car industry. They knew it. They knew full well what they were doing that day.</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Kennedy on a point of order?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Katter</name>
    <name.id>HX4</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Point of order: the member is misleading the House. It was Keating that took a 25 per cent reduction and started off—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member will resume his seat. The member for Lalor has the call, but, before I give the call to the member for Lalor, I warn everyone in this House. As I said earlier, this is not a playground. You're not to throw comments across the floor with your loud voices, disrupting the procedure. I ask you, for the benefit of this House, to calm down and keep it quiet. Everyone gets a go. If you want to speak, you put your name down on the list and you speak. The member for Lalor has the call.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RYAN</name>
    <name.id>249224</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Companies using Australian minerals to manufacture solar panels to put on our roofs are what this legislation is about. It's about researchers making breakthroughs in science that will lead to new medicines. Under Labor, we're generating 25 per cent more renewable energy and we've ticked off enough renewable projects to power three million homes. On this side of the chamber, we believe in Australian ingenuity, we believe in Australians' capacity to work together and, most importantly, we believe it is our duty to respond to the crisis of global warning and to be part of the solution. This is an opportunity for Australia. We're compelled to do it because it's the right thing to do; why wouldn't we grab that opportunity with both hands and drive manufacturing in this country? It will create opportunities in our regions and our suburbs, in our factories and our labs, in our TAFEs and our unis.</para>
<para>It is mind-boggling to listen to those opposite this week express a lack of faith in Australia's competitive capability. That lack of faith reflects what they truly believe about our country. What they truly believe about our country is that we're second rate. They believe we're second class. I don't. I believe this is the best country in the world. I believe in the capacity of Australians. I've spent my life working with young people in this country. I know what they're capable of; I taught them. I know them. They are capable of anything. I wish those opposite believed the same. I wish they believed that we were capable of leading the world as we have done time and time again. I wish that, when we celebrated the gold medals of our athletes, those opposite believed we could win gold medals in manufacturing, but they don't. They don't believe you can pick winners, because they don't believe we are winners. That's the bottom line and what I've learnt in the two days of this debate. That is what I've heard.</para>
<para>The Labor government is about creating opportunity in our regions, and I would think the member for Kennedy would want to talk about our regions and creating opportunities in our regions, because the member for Kennedy represents an incredibly large region in this country where ingenuity has been demonstrated for decades. We need a government prepared to step up and do its part, and this legislation is this government saying that that's exactly what we will do, that we will fund the apprenticeships, attract the investment to build the infrastructure, boost the industries and back the ideas of Australians.</para>
<para>In closing, I find it incredibly disappointing those opposite, from opposition, want to stand in the way of Australia moving forward. I know that that's echoed in the place I represent. They want to move forward. They want to be a place where manufacturing occurs. They want a better life for their children than you left them after a decade in office.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The debate is interrupted. In accordance with standing order 43, the debate may be resumed at a later hour, and the member will have leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</title>
        <page.no>47</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Nicholls Electorate: Arts and Culture</title>
          <page.no>47</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BIRRELL</name>
    <name.id>288713</name.id>
    <electorate>Nicholls</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to talk about investment in regional communities. I'll use two examples: SAM and MOVE. And no, I'm not talking about myself. SAM is the Shepparton Art Museum. You may not know that Shepparton is home to one of the finest collections of ceramics in Australia. A new art museum was needed to expand and incorporate a major collection of Indigenous art generously offered by the Gantner family. SAM also has Kaiela Arts, which is a First Nations industry that supports working artists. The previous coalition government backed the project with $15 million. SAM now stands overlooking Victoria Park Lake and is a drawcard for the region and the cultural centre of Shepparton.</para>
<para>MOVE is the Museum of Vehicle Evolution. It started in 2011. It is predominantly a car museum. It exists entirely through the philanthropy and the hard work of enthusiasts. MOVE wanted to expand to incorporate other forms of transport, particularly trucks. From the earliest days of fruit growing in the Goulburn Valley, the produce needed to be transported to market. Orchard families bought one truck, then a second truck, and soon they were running a cartage business. Again, the former coalition government recognised the potential and invested $2.5 million to support the expansion of MOVE.</para>
<para>Both investments have reaped rewards for the region in attracting visitors and extending the length of their stays. They're good for the economy, good for local business and good for a regional community. To those opposite, all I say is: there should be more of this investment, not less.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>North-West Mobile Force</title>
          <page.no>48</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GOSLING</name>
    <name.id>245392</name.id>
    <electorate>Solomon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In recent weeks over Territory skies Exercise Pitch Black was in full flight, with 21 nations, 140 aircraft and 4,000 crew. Unfortunately, an Italian pilot encountered some complications with his jet aircraft, but he ejected safely over the Daly River region. Troops from the North-West Mobile Force, known as NORFORCE, were conducting patrolling not that far away, in Territory terms. They became aware of the pilot ejecting. He'd parachuted into heavy bush. The NORFORCE patrol responded quickly with a search-and-rescue mission. They navigated their way to the pilot using a combination of GPS, compasses and maps.</para>
<para>Their valued contribution is one that I am extremely proud to report to the House today. Indeed, I was proud to serve with NORFORCE when I was in the Army. They're based in my electorate of Solomon. They act as the eyes and ears in the north—all over the Territory, actually, and out to the Kimberley—in much the same way as the 51st Battalion, Far North Queensland Regiment does in Far North Queensland and the Pilbara Regiment does in the West. Thanks to the efforts of these troops and other responders, the pilot was found safe, and he made a full recovery.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Flynn Electorate: Schools</title>
          <page.no>48</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOYCE</name>
    <name.id>299498</name.id>
    <electorate>Flynn</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The wider Gracemere community has been advocating for a high school for almost 30 years. In this time various petitions and campaigns have been formed by the local community. Last week there was exciting news from the LNP candidate for Rockhampton, Donna Kirkland, and the LNP candidate for Mirani, Glen Kelly, that a state LNP government will build a high school at Gracemere.</para>
<para>The nearest state high school to Gracemere is Rockhampton State High School, which is located at Campbell Street, Wandal. As the school is the only state secondary facility on the southern side of the city, it draws its student population from families of diverse economic and vocational backgrounds. The diversity includes nearby Gracemere, which is an urban development, along with semi-rural properties and small farming communities extending to Gogango in the west and to Bajool and Marmor in the south. Over 600 students rely on buses to Rockhampton every day. Overcrowded buses, high student-teacher ratios in classrooms, and bullying and overstimulation of children before they even get to the classroom are just some of the issues raised by parents calling for a high school in Gracemere.</para>
<para>I'm sure the announcement by the state LNP to build a high school at Gracemere will be strongly welcomed by the wider Gracemere community. Well done to the local residents, as well as to Donna and Glen, for your strong advocacy.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission</title>
          <page.no>48</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MASCARENHAS</name>
    <name.id>298800</name.id>
    <electorate>Swan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The standards you walk past are the standards you accept. It's clear that during the 46th Parliament there were allegations of harassment and bullying. Frankly, it was unacceptable. This is the highest decision-making body in the country, and we must set the standard. That is why I am proud that the Albanese Labor government is introducing a bill to establish the Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission, which is about delivering recommendation 22 of the <inline font-style="italic">Set the </inline><inline font-style="italic">standard</inline> report. What this seeks to do is hold politicians to account. For too long we have been in a place where politicians could not be held to account. Now there will be consequences if people are found to have engaged in bullying or harassment. This includes things such as fines of up to five per cent of your salary and being kicked off committees.</para>
<para>This is a place where everyone should feel safe. It doesn't matter what your gender, sex or race is. Everyone deserves to have a safe workplace. It doesn't matter whether you're at a bar, a mine site or the federal parliament. We deserve better. The Australian public deserves better.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gawler Show</title>
          <page.no>48</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURNELL</name>
    <name.id>300129</name.id>
    <electorate>Spence</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's that time of the year again. The Gawler Show, which is South Australia's largest regional show and the historic beating heart of the community spirit in the town of Gawler, returns this weekend on 24 and 25 August. Established in 1854, the Gawler Show brings together tens of thousands of people both in my community and across South Australia, showcasing the brilliance of our region in agriculture and animal husbandry. While that rich tradition of farming excellence in South Australia's regions continues to this day, the Gawler Show has also grown up significantly, embracing a format jam packed full of fun and activities. I'm talking everything from rides, show bags and fireworks to blacksmithing, woodchipping and sheep shearing. On top of live music, there will be silent discos, a racing simulator and, the most important feature of all, your local federal MP giving out a whole bunch of free goodies on the treasure trail.</para>
<para>I could not be more honoured to be part of such a storied event in my electorate, both as a patron and now as a stallholder. My staff and I will be present throughout both days for a chat, so I encourage everyone able to get down to the Gawler Show to do so. It's South Australia's place to be this weekend.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Great Artesian Basin</title>
          <page.no>49</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KATTER</name>
    <name.id>HX4</name.id>
    <electorate>Kennedy</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>There was a very foolish initiative by the federal government which allowed the contamination of the Great Artesian aquifer. People are ignorant of the history of our nation, but there were not many people living in inland Queensland and, to a lesser extent, inland New South Wales, because there was no surface water. That was most certainly true of Queensland and to a lesser extent in New South Wales. We dug a hole in the ground and up came water from the Great Artesian aquifer. There is only a population, a wool industry and a cattle industry as a result of the Great Artesian Basin. For a government to have allowed the contamination by a foreign corporation of the Great Artesian aquifer is absolutely disgraceful. The person that stood up and fought this battle is Shane McCarthy, a very great Australian. Not only did he fight the battle and win the battle against the pollution and poisoning of the artesian aquifer but he also was the great hero and, arguably, the instituter of the first dam scheme in 30-odd years of Queensland history.</para>
<para>If my electorate were a separate nation, I would represent more water than any other nation on earth per area of land. It's the wettest part of Australia, yet we have no water because— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Disability Insurance Scheme</title>
          <page.no>49</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILKIE</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
    <electorate>Clark</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise on behalf of James Newell, a valued member of the Clark community who recently interned in my office. James, a young man with high-functioning autism, is dedicated to advocating for reform of the NDIS. James tells me that the NDIS has become focused on fixing individuals with disabilities rather than on supporting them. He explains that this causes him significant stress because any progress he makes in life could result in a cut to the very services responsible for his success. Moreover, the increasing costs of services terrifies James. He describes squeezing the services he needs into an ever-diminishing pool of funding until some are squeezed out, including support to attend social events that help him maintain friendships. In his words, this leaves him with, 'No support, no pillars, no life.'</para>
<para>James has enormous potential when given the right support. The NDIS helps him 'be an active member of Australia's great society'. Indeed, research from Per Capita shows that every dollar spent on the NDIS returns $2.25 to the economy. The contribution James can make is something I saw firsthand when he worked in my office. So, on James's behalf, I call on the government to meaningfully reform the NDIS so that people with a disability can reach their full potential.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Nuclear Energy</title>
          <page.no>49</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PERRETT</name>
    <name.id>HVP</name.id>
    <electorate>Moreton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I know I've only got 90 seconds, but I've got a rather serious matter to speak about. I need bit of guidance, because, when we have divisions and people move around the chamber, sometimes people leave documents behind. I assume this belonged to the member for Fairfax, but I'm not sure. Whilst in a division, I came across the opposition's plan for nuclear reactors. I just wanted to see if I could—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PERRETT</name>
    <name.id>HVP</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'll take that interjection from the member for Kennedy. I just wanted to refer to it, because obviously this big plan opposite in terms of building nuclear power is something that we should share with the House as much as possible. This is the member for Fairfax's alternative energy plan. It's a serious energy plan, according to the member for Fairfax, but we know that we're just focused on making sure that people have cheaper electricity. He has a plan—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Ted O'Brien</name>
    <name.id>138932</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>How's that one going, Graham?</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PERRETT</name>
    <name.id>HVP</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'll take that interjection, member for Fairfax, because energy bills have gone down. In Queensland, we've got a state government that's actually giving a cut to people and we've got a federal government giving a cut to people as well. So obviously your plan for 2050, delivering a nuclear power reactor—I can give you your plan back if you want, member for Fairfax—is just that: build nuclear plants by 2050. That's it. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Council of Mayors (South East Queensland)</title>
          <page.no>49</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUCHHOLZ</name>
    <name.id>230531</name.id>
    <electorate>Wright</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It gives me great pleasure today to announce and welcome the Council of Mayors (South East Queensland), chaired by the Lord Mayor of Brisbane, Adrian Schrinner. They are in the House today. They are the pre-eminent advocacy group for local government in the south-east corner. Attending is Peter Flannery, Teresa Harding, Tanya Milligan and Geoff McDonald, from their respective shires. In addition, there are another six mayors who have only just taken on the role of mayor at the last local government elections. They are Frank Wilkie, Jon Raven, Jos Mitchell, Tom Sharp, Jason Wendt and Rosanna Natoli.</para>
<para>The Council of Mayors (South East Queensland) do an amazing job, particularly in Queensland, where they represent no less than four million ratepayers, which represent 73 per cent of the great state of Queensland. That's one in seven Australians across the entire country, so it's a significant body. While they're here, they'll be discussing the infrastructure requirements required for South-East Queensland and Queensland as a whole for the Olympic Games, along with a myriad of other topics such as the growth infrastructure plan, South-East Queensland waste management and smarter regions. I invite everyone in this great country to, if ever you're in South-East Queensland, make yourself known to this council of mayors. They are great, eminent Australians.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gilmore Electorate: Malua Bay Beach Reserve</title>
          <page.no>50</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs PHILLIPS</name>
    <name.id>147140</name.id>
    <electorate>Gilmore</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>During the Black Summer bushfires, hundreds of residents took refuge at the beach reserve on the shores of Malua Bay, in the Eurobodalla, as flames and smoke bore down on them. After such a traumatic experience, many local families now hold a deep connection to that reserve, so I was really pleased to have secured more than $1 million in federal funding to create a special place for them. The beach reserve has now been completely transformed, with a wonderful playground, climbing gyms, exercise equipment, a flying fox and a very cool basketball half court. There are new accessible amenities, covered barbecue areas, beautiful gardens and a spectacular viewing platform for our community to enjoy. It is now a happy place.</para>
<para>It was so wonderful to open this amazing upgraded reserve, which I know is greatly loved and will continue to be well used by families in Malua Bay and surrounding areas, as well as by visitors to this spectacular stretch of coastline. I was absolutely overjoyed on opening day to see the huge smiles on the kids' faces as they flew through the air on the flying fox. I took the opportunity to shoot a few hoops with local teenagers on the basketball court. The federal government's Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program continues to create wonderful community spaces like this—projects that support the resilience of local economies and that create regional jobs by delivering community infrastructure. Thanks to the Eurobodalla Shire Council, the Batemans Bay Lions Club and all who supported this amazing project.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Albanese Government</title>
          <page.no>50</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CALDWELL</name>
    <name.id>306489</name.id>
    <electorate>Fadden</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This week children across Australia are celebrating Book Week. This morning my two youngest daughters went along to daycare dressed in a unicorn theme, inspired by one of their favourite books, <inline font-style="italic">Thelma the Unicorn</inline>. It's crucial to instil a love of reading in our young ones, but this also extends to adults. Reading broadens our knowledge and understanding, offering insights into a variety of fields. I, for example, have recently enjoyed reading the Troy Bramston books on Hawke and Keating, which reminded me of an era when the Labor Party actually cared about the economy, how to manage it and how to show some level of competence in government.</para>
<para>This week I'd like to recommend a book for the Treasurer to read: 'Economics 101'. If the Treasurer had grasped the basics of economics instead of getting his qualification as a doctor of spin then perhaps he would understand that injecting billions of dollars into the economy fuels inflation. Labor's failure to manage our economy has become alarmingly evident. We've warned about the consequences of their cash splashes, and now, in an election year, Labor is trying to fool Australians with more empty promises designed purely to secure votes. With 12 interest rates hikes and some of the most stubborn core inflation in the developed world, Australian families are paying the price for Labor's mismanagement. To go back to the Bob Hawke book, if you're not going to lead, get out of the way and let somebody else do it.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Renewable Energy</title>
          <page.no>50</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr ANANDA-RAJAH</name>
    <name.id>290544</name.id>
    <electorate>Higgins</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Australia going from a fossil fuel giant to the 'sun king' just came a step closer with the approval of the Sun Cable project by Tanya Plibersek. Sun Cable is an audacious project that will blanket 12,000 hectares of pastoral land in the Northern Territory with solar panels generating four gigawatts of continuous renewable energy which will be used for much-needed green industries in Darwin, with some shipped to Singapore via a 4,000-kilometre undersea cable. It will bring almost six times the energy of a 700-megawatt large nuclear reactor, and—here's the best part—with no overdraft from the Australian taxpayer and no iodine tablets for communities.</para>
<para>In a million years, this project would never have been signed off by the Liberals. Their brand of pessimistic politics is about division and doubling down on the past—on coal and gas, which is what they really crave while their uncosted, unviable and divisive nuclear reactors remain decades away in the never-never. Sun Cable is one of 55 renewable energy projects signed off on by this Albanese Labor government, enough to power seven million homes—that's New South Wales and Victoria and a bit more combined. Only renewables with storage, and a little bit of gas to fill in the gaps, can keep the lights on, lower our energy bills, bring an abundance of jobs for our kids—and there they are up there in the gallery—and get us to net zero.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Banking and Financial Services</title>
          <page.no>51</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CONAGHAN</name>
    <name.id>279991</name.id>
    <electorate>Cowper</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today I'm calling out the shameless and despicable greed of our major banks, as reported across several media outlets yesterday. These financial giants have shown nothing but contempt for the Australian people, particularly in their disgraceful decision to slash term deposit rates. Right now, while Australian families are barely keeping their heads above water, struggling under the crushing weight of relentless interest rate hikes, what does the Commonwealth Bank do? After raking in a jaw-dropping $9.48 billion profit, the CBA has had the audacity to kick its customers when they are down. It was the first to slash term deposit rates by up to 50 basis points, and NAV and Westpac were quick to follow, to jump on the bandwagon, slashing theirs by 80 basis points.</para>
<para>The hardest hit are our self-funded retirees. They rely on term deposits to support themselves, and now their livelihoods are being squeezed even further by this decision. The big banks are shamelessly fattening their wallets at the expense of everyday Australians, who are already drowning in the soaring cost-of-living crisis. It's high time these banks stopped their relentless profiteering and started to show some decency by supporting rather than squeezing the very communities they pretend to serve. You are not our friends, I bet you'll go and give yourselves a big pay rise.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Energy Efficiency Grants for Small and Medium Sized Enterprises program</title>
          <page.no>51</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COKER</name>
    <name.id>263547</name.id>
    <electorate>Corangamite</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I know and the Albanese government knows that small business is the engine room of our economy. To boost small business, we've just rolled out two amazing rounds of energy efficiency grants. These are being embraced by small businesses across my electorate of Corangamite, from distilleries to retailers, from farmers to breweries. This grant is helping businesses reduce their energy bills to embrace energy efficiency technology and reduce emissions.</para>
<para>Last week, I visited Jono at Bells Beach Brewing in Torquay to congratulate him on receiving a $23,000 energy efficiency grant. Jono said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… it's awesome, it means we'll be able to do a feasibility study on pre-heating our water with heat pumps which are a lot more efficient and also use more of our solar power on-site rather than exporting it to the grid. That means we don't have to draw as much energy which will reduce our costs.</para></quote>
<para>It makes absolute sense for small business to take up this opportunity, reducing their energy costs and driving down emissions.</para>
<para>And just this morning, the Minister for Environment and Water made a generation-defining announcement— ticking off Australia's biggest renewable solar energy project ever! This heralds Australia's arrival as a world leader in green energy. It's a win for our environment and a win for reducing energy bills.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Inland Rail</title>
          <page.no>51</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr COULTON</name>
    <name.id>HWN</name.id>
    <electorate>Parkes</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Over the years, I've heard magnificent speeches in this place about decentralisation, regional development, lower carbon emissions, cheaper prices in our capital cities, better access to ports for farms and miners, lower use of fossil fuel, jobs for Aboriginal people, a lower death toll on the Newell Highway and support for the Australian steel industry. There is one project that does all of those things: the Inland Rail project. But, for the last two years, there has been no activity north of Narromine. The farmers are wondering whether they should be negotiating to sell their land—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Hasluck!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr COULTON</name>
    <name.id>HWN</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Will the one-term member on the other side be quiet for a bit?</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Member for Parkes, I did in fact ask the member for Hasluck to stop her interjections. And I'm warning you!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr COULTON</name>
    <name.id>HWN</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Prime Minister championed this project back when he was a minister in the Gillard-Rudd government. At the moment there, there's no-one. Neither Minister King nor the Prime Minister have been to that area to explain anything to those communities, farmers and businesses that are having to sell their equipment to make ends meet.</para>
<para>Prime Minister, don't send another gormless senator to go to those towns and patronise those people about what's going on. Hop on the jet—there are plenty of places to land at Narromine, Narrabri and Moree—and talk to the people and explain to them what's happened with this project.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Homelessness</title>
          <page.no>51</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MILLER-FROST</name>
    <name.id>296272</name.id>
    <electorate>Boothby</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Yesterday, I met with David Pearson, the CEO of Australian Alliance to End Homelessness, and Tim Richter, from the Canadian Alliance to End Homelessness. David and I worked together in the homelessness sector for many years when he was CEO of Adelaide Zero Project and I was co-chair. The Adelaide Zero Project is a collaboration between all three layers of government, including health, housing and police, and the not-for-profit sector, working together to end rough sleeping in the Adelaide CBD. The model is now being replicated across Australia in 29 communities, ranging from Geraldton to the City of Port Phillip.</para>
<para>The zero model is based on a by-name list, where we know each person sleeping rough by name and what they need to exit homelessness forever. The aim is that homelessness should be rare, brief and non-recurring. The key was all three layers of government working together, along with the not-for-profits, sharing data with consent and ensuring scarce resources were spread to those in need, focusing on homelessness prevention and support.</para>
<para>Queensland data shows that housing people with full social supports is $13,000 a year cheaper per person than keeping them homeless on the streets, and most people don't need that support ongoing. So there's a financial reason as well as common humanity in ending rough sleeping. Many thanks to Minister Clare O'Neil and her staff for making time to meet with them and to attend the forum.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East: Migration</title>
          <page.no>52</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HASTIE</name>
    <name.id>260805</name.id>
    <electorate>Canning</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Albanese government has punched a hole into Australia's border security. They've ignored vital security checks and issued thousands of tourist visas to people from a war zone controlled by Hamas, a listed terrorist organisation. This troubles me and many Australians. To be clear, most Palestinians living in Gaza are people of decent character and they have no choice about where they are born or where they raise their families. But there may be some among them who support Hamas and its use of violence, and they shouldn't be allowed to come to Australia—no exceptions.</para>
<para>The coalition therefore has called for a pause on all Gazan refugees entering Australia. We have asked the Prime Minister to give a straight answer about the process for issuing almost 3,000 tourist visas to people from Gaza. The Australian people deserve assurance that the Prime Minister has done proper identity and security vetting of these people because Australians shouldn't have to absorb that risk themselves into their own communities. The opposition leader has been a lone voice on this. Labor, the Greens and the Teals have maliciously tried to smear him with accusations of racism, but this is just a lazy and nasty way of silencing legitimate debate and questions about an important issue. Thankfully, he is big enough to take the abuse. We're big enough to take the abuse. We're happy to ask the tough questions of this government because our priority always is to keep the Australian people safe.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cost of Living</title>
          <page.no>52</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REPACHOLI</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>If we had a dollar for every time those opposite said no to cost-of-living relief, we wouldn't need to worry about the cost of living. We'd be rich. They're like the grumpy, strict grandparents who say no to everything. Can we change the TV channel? No. Can we go to the park? No. Can we make life easier for Australians by introducing cost-of-living relief? No. I certainly wouldn't want to be their grandchild. They're no fun at all. There are so many ways to describe the 'no-alition'. They're like a traffic light stuck on red. No matter how much you need cost-of-living relief to help you move forward, they're stuck in the way, saying no. The opposition are like a vending machine that takes your money but never delivers your snacks. They will say anything to get your vote, but when you put your faith in them they will leave you hungry for cost-of-living relief. In fact, those opposite remind me a little bit of Squidward from my kids' favourite burger themed TV show, <inline font-style="italic">Sponge</inline><inline font-style="italic">B</inline><inline font-style="italic">ob Square</inline><inline font-style="italic">P</inline><inline font-style="italic">ants</inline>. They're always cynical and salty. They're always saying no. They complain about a problem that those opposite don't have a solution for.</para>
<para>Luckily, we are a government that doesn't say no, and we're delivering cost-of-living relief for all Australians. That's what the Albanese Labor government does. We deliver for Australians, unlike you guys opposite. They just do what? What do they do, everyone? Say no!</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union</title>
          <page.no>52</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FLETCHER</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
    <electorate>Bradfield</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to recognise three great moments of people acting surprised in the performing arts when something very bad is revealed that they knew about all along: <inline font-style="italic">Casablanca</inline>—'I'm shocked, shocked, to find out that gambling is going on in here'; <inline font-style="italic">Muriel's Wedding</inline>—'Deirdre Chambers, what a coincidence!'; and Australia's Minister for the Arts and Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations on 17 July—'The reported behaviour from the construction division of the CFMEU is abhorrent, and it's intolerable.' This is the same minister who jumped to the CFMEU's bidding to abolish the Australian Building and Construction Commission in 2022, the same minister who rammed through successive rounds of changes to the Fair Work Act to give new powers to CFMEU officials to enter into businesses anywhere in Australia, bringing their baseball bats with them, and the same minister who failed to support a bill in February 2024 which would have allowed the manufacturing division to demerge from the CFMEU, something which the mainly women workers in the textile, clothing and footwear sector desperately wanted.</para>
<para>Labor claims to support the equality of women in the workforce, but it's amazing how you can overlook your principles for $6.2 million of donations. The conduct of the member for Watson and the Albanese Labor government in running a protection racket for the CFMEU has been a disgrace. Thankfully, Labor's wet-lettuce administration bill has been toughened up thanks to great work by Senator Cash, but it was only necessary because this Prime Minister was willing to look the other way— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Future Made in Australia</title>
          <page.no>53</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LAWRENCE</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
    <electorate>Hasluck</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The coalition are just starting to realise that the Albanese government's Future Made in Australia policy is not just good; it's pretty popular too. The students up here in the gallery will know that. We know it's starting to bite when the member for Fairfax comes in here and says that he doesn't like the name of the bill. Well, too bad! It's a framework for a future made in Australia. If the coalition had spent any of the last two years on policy development rather than on their silly nuclear fantasy, then they could have had their own vision of a future made in Australia, but they don't. Instead, they can't accept the science. Instead, the member for Mallee thinks green hydrogen, which is starting to be manufactured all around the world, is still experimental. Instead, the member for Riverina thinks we are rushing to renewables, as though that's a bad thing, and he reckons we need to have another look at the coalition's three-eyed nuclear red herring. Instead, the member for Hume, without any shame, tries to use the term 'pork-barrelling', on which he could write a book. Instead, the member for Hinkler thinks that a national interest framework is no basis for decision-making!</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
<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>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LAWRENCE</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Seriously, these contributions from the opposition range from the daft to the ludicrous.</para>
<para>Meanwhile, back home in Hasluck, cutting-edge companies like BJC, Centurion and Hofmann Engineering are getting on with it, because the Albanese government has instilled the confidence and the business certainty to get on with making a future in Australia. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>MINISTRY</title>
        <page.no>53</page.no>
        <type>MINISTRY</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Temporary Arrangements</title>
          <page.no>53</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I inform the House that the Minister for Housing and Minister for Homelessness will be absent from question time today. The Treasurer will answer questions on her behalf.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>CONDOLENCES</title>
        <page.no>53</page.no>
        <type>CONDOLENCES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Pritchard, Mr Thomas Page</title>
          <page.no>53</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report from Federation Chamber</title>
            <page.no>53</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that the motion moved by the honourable the Prime Minister be agreed to. As a mark of respect, I ask all present to signify their approval by rising in their places.</para>
<para>Question agreed to, honourable members standing in their places.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</title>
        <page.no>53</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East: Migration</title>
          <page.no>53</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 Prime Minister. Journalist Mark Riley from Channel 7 has reported that, of the 43 tourist visas the government granted—and then cancelled—to those from the terrorist controlled Gaza war zone since October 7, 20 have been reinstated on appeal. Can the Prime Minister confirm that this is accurate?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm asked about Mark Riley's reports. Mark Riley's reports are always worth watching on Channel 7. Mark Riley has also reported on Channel 7 that Hamas didn't take over the Occupied Palestinian Territories and the Gaza Strip on October 7 but that they were actually there beforehand, when those opposite were granting 1,000 visitor visas to people from the Occupied Palestinian Territories. I can certainly confirm that, of the visitor visas that have been granted since October 7, the only cancellations have been offshore.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cost of Living</title>
          <page.no>54</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SITOU</name>
    <name.id>298121</name.id>
    <electorate>Reid</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. How is the Albanese Labor government delivering cost-of-living relief? Why is this so important, and what approaches has the government ruled out?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for her question. It was great to be with the member in her electorate over the weekend at Ferragosto. We had a wonderful day together, and I've got to say the member was very well received in her electorate.</para>
<para>We know that Australians are under pressure, which is why from day one we've focused on cost-of-living relief. On 1 July we delivered that not just for the electorate of Reid but for every single taxpayer. Each of them received a tax cut—all 13.6 million of them. We've delivered energy bill relief for every single household, an extra two weeks of government funded paid parental leave and a freeze on the cost of PBS medicines, and we've backed in a pay rise for 2.6 million award-wage workers. Last week we added to that, with a 15 per cent pay rise for our early educators who work in our childcare centres right around the country. But, once again, we did it in a way that will keep costs down for working families by making sure that there's a guarantee there. Again, we're delivering and making a difference to cost of living whilst putting downward pressure on inflation. Of course, the two budget surpluses delivered by the Treasurer have really helped with that as well. This week we're working with the education minister on the legislation that will cut $3 billion from student debt. As well as that, we've got legislation to put super on paid parental leave. This is our priority as a government.</para>
<para>For those opposite, of course, it's clearly not their priority—more concerned with the Middle East than Middle Australia, not concerned with cost-of-living relief or the economy at all. Indeed, the only thing that they have to offer on cost of living is ways to make the problem worse: a wages scheme to drive down pay, a supermarkets scheme to push up grocery prices and a nuclear obsession to drive up power bills. They are obsessed with division. What we're focused on is delivery. They want to play cheap politics. We're delivering cheaper childcare. He wants to drag this whole debate into the gutter. We're focused on lifting wages and lifting Australia up. He wants to drive Australians apart. We're bringing people together. That's our focus: delivering on cost of living while making a difference to working Australia and Middle Australia.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East: Migration</title>
          <page.no>54</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LEY</name>
    <name.id>00AMN</name.id>
    <electorate>Farrer</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. Of the almost 3,000 visas approved for people from the terrorist controlled Gaza war zone, how many were approved by an automated process and did not involve a referral to ASIO?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for her question, which goes to automated processes! I'm reminded of who was obsessed by automated processes when they took the humans out of human services, with catastrophic consequences for Australians. They're not concerned about the impact on real Australians that they had in government with robodebt. We will continue to be focused on the needs of Australians. We will continue to be focused on the issues that are of concern to them. I've answered many questions about these issues. They're obsessed by it. What we're focused on are the same issues that Australians are interested in.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cost of Living</title>
          <page.no>54</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms DOYLE</name>
    <name.id>299962</name.id>
    <electorate>Aston</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Treasurer. Why are decent earnings an important part of the Albanese Labor government's efforts to help ease cost-of-living pressures? How does this approach differ to what has failed in the past?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr CHALMERS</name>
    <name.id>37998</name.id>
    <electorate>Rankin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thanks to the member for Aston for the way that she represents her local community and understands that cost-of-living pressures are the main game right now. When we came to office, inflation was higher than it is now and it was rising. Wages were stagnant, and that meant that real wages were going backwards really quite substantially. And the tax cuts were skewed to people who were already on the highest incomes. There were deficits as far as the eye can see and there was $1 trillion of liberal debt in a budget weighed down by waste and rorts.</para>
<para>We've turned two of those deficits into Labor surpluses. We created almost a million jobs. Inflation has come off substantially, wages growth has almost doubled and annual real wages are growing again on our watch. But we know that people are still under pressure, and that's why cost-of-living pressures are our primary focus. That's the big difference between our focus on cost of living on this side of the House and them ignoring cost-of-living pressures on that side of the House. We are rolling out meaningful, substantial and responsible cost-of-living help: a tax cut for every taxpayer, energy bill relief for every household, cheaper medicines, cheaper early childhood education and help with rent. We're also making a meaningful difference when it comes to people taking home more pay, earning more and keeping more of what they earn.</para>
<para>On our watch, the average full-time worker is now earning around $104,000 dollars. That's an increase of $8,273 a year or $159 a week since we were elected. That same worker is now getting a tax cut of $43.72 a week or $2,274 this year. Now, if the same worker had seen the same wages growth we saw from those opposite and the old stage 3 tax cuts that they had legislated, they'd be taking home $3,235 less per year than they are under us. That's $62 per week. They're earning more under us.</para>
<para>Those opposite want lower pay. They want less help with the cost of living. They want higher inflation. They want higher interest rates. They have absolutely no costed or credible economic policies, and they won't tell us where $315 billion in cuts are coming from and what those cuts will mean for Medicare, for pensions and for the economy more broadly.</para>
<para>We are focused on the main game on this side of the House, which is the cost of living. We're fighting inflation, we're delivering surplus budgets, we're rolling out cost-of-living help and, very importantly, we are ensuring that more Australians 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>Before I call the member for Goldstein: the member for Riverina was constantly interjecting during that answer. He is going to cease interjecting for the remainder of this question and question time or he will be warned.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gambling Advertising</title>
          <page.no>55</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms DANIEL</name>
    <name.id>008CH</name.id>
    <electorate>Goldstein</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. This week a mum in my electorate emailed me: 'I am the daughter of a gambler,' she said, 'I grew up walking on eggshells. One minute, home was full of love and joy, the next uncertainty and despair.' Her father gambled away the family's life savings and then took his own life. Now with a 12-year-old son, she says of gambling ads on TV: 'It terrifies me.' Prime Minister, how would you justify only a partial gambling ad ban to this mother, who fears for her child?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Goldstein for her question and for sharing the very personal story of one of her constituents. That personal story indicates the fact that this is not something new. If someone with a 12-year-old son is speaking about her life experience when she was a child, then one would assume that that was decades ago. Indeed, that goes towards the fact that gambling has been an issue in our society, I suspect, since man and woman walked and had a bet on who could ride a horse the fastest or who could run from rock to rock—probably before there were buildings. So this has been around for a long period of time.</para>
<para>In the last two years, we have done more to tackle gambling harm than in the entire period before then, from when this woman was a young child watching her father waste away the assets in that family. More in two years. We have delivered the most significant online wagering harm reduction initiatives of the last decade, including mandatory customer ID verification, banning the use of credit cards for online wagering, forcing online wagering companies to send their customers monthly activity statements—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It's going to be very difficult for the member to take a point of order on relevance when the Prime Minister is delivering his answer regarding the argument in the question, regarding what he is doing on this topic. It's going to be difficult for the member to take a point of order on relevance. I have explained to the House what the Prime Minister is doing with this question. But, out of respect for the member for Goldstein, she has the call.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Daniel</name>
    <name.id>008CH</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It is on relevance. The question went to the reasoning behind a partial ban, and I'm sure this mother would appreciate a direct answer. Thank you.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Prime Minister is being directly relevant.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I am being relevant, not based upon hypotheticals but based upon what we have actually done, most of which I assume was supported by the member for Goldstein and supported by most members of this chamber. We have said that the status quo regarding the saturation of gambling advertising is untenable, and those are issues that we are working through. We have done all of this. We have launched BetStop, which has meant that 27,000 Australians have now registered as of 31 July. That is 27,000 Australian families who will benefit directly now, today, not some decades ago, which I acknowledge has been an issue. People used to gamble at the SP bookies around the corner from where I grew up. Gambling has changed in its nature, but it is still around.</para>
<para>The new minimum classifications that were done for videogames have made a difference. There are different taglines—very different from the ones that we inherited, which just said, 'Gamble responsibly.' What does that mean? Now they clearly indicate, 'If you gamble, you will lose,' and they point towards the opportunity cost of spending money on gambling rather than on other things. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DISTINGUISHED VISITORS</title>
        <page.no>56</page.no>
        <type>DISTINGUISHED VISITORS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Council of Mayors (South East Queensland), Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, State and Territory Parliaments, Canberra Fellowships Program, Forshaw, Mr Michael, BAPS Temples Association</title>
          <page.no>56</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>Before I call the member for Lingiari, I would just like to do some acknowledgement in the chamber today. I inform the House that present in the gallery today are representatives from the Council of Mayors (South East Queensland) led by the chair of the council and Lord Mayor of Brisbane, Councillor Adrian Schrinner. I inform the House that also present also in the gallery today is a delegation from the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community as guests of the Minister for Communications. We have a number of ministers and members from parliaments around Australia. I inform the House that present in the gallery today is a delegation from Thailand led by Ms Chayapa Sindhuprai. They are here today as part of their participation in the Canberra Fellowships Program. I would also like to recognise former senator for New South Wales Mr Michael Forshaw, and members of the BAPS temples association of the Hindu faith, led by Mr P Bhadresh Swami and other swamis, accompanied by leaders of the BAPS community in Australia. Welcome to you all.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</title>
        <page.no>56</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme</title>
          <page.no>56</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SCRYMGOUR</name>
    <name.id>F2S</name.id>
    <electorate>Lingiari</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Health and Aged Care. How is the Albanese Labor government ensuring Australians have access to life-changing medicines on the PBS after a decade of cuts and neglect? Why is it important to make medicines cheaper?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUTLER</name>
    <name.id>HWK</name.id>
    <electorate>Hindmarsh</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the terrific member for Lingiari for that question. She knows Australia has one of the best medicine systems in the world, underpinned, of course, by the PBS, another great Labor legacy that was opposed tooth and nail at the time by the Liberal Party. In just two years, we have made more than 200 new or expanded listings on the PBS.</para>
<para>This month, we listed the first ever immunotherapy cancer jab, Tecentriq, which treats lung and liver cancer. Different immunotherapies, as I think we all know, are offering cancer patients new hope and longer lives, but those patients spend literally hours and hours in hospitals receiving their treatment through intravenous drips. Now, for the first time, Tecentriq will be available for more than 4,000 patients through a very simple injection delivered at home or in a GP clinic, saving more than 60,000 hours of hospital time every single year. Without PBS listing, this convenient, life-saving injection would cost $120,000 a year, but now it will be available at affordable PBS prices</para>
<para>Of course, we've been making those PBS prices even cheaper. In our first three months, we slashed the maximum amount that millions of pensioners pay for their medicines every year by 25 per cent; in our first 12 months, we delivered the biggest cut to the price of medicines in 75 years; and, in our first 18 months, we finally allowed doctors to prescribe certain common medicines for 60 days supply rather than just 30. Cheaper medicines have made a real difference to millions and millions of Australians. But we know that household budgets are still under very real pressure and we know we need to do more, which is why we've also decided to freeze the price of PBS medicines for up to five years, which will save Australians another $500 million in their pockets.</para>
<para>But we also know that this progress in making medicines so much cheaper is under real and direct threat from those opposite. The shadow Treasurer last week, of course, confirmed that he doesn't support any of our investment in cheaper medicines—part of his $315 billion in secret cuts that are coming our way.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Minister for Climate Change and Energy will cease interjecting.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUTLER</name>
    <name.id>HWK</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Let's face it: Liberal governments have form in this area. The Howard government in their final term jacked up the price of medicine scripts by $5 for general patients, and the Leader of the Opposition, when he was health minister, tried to repeat the trick by jacking up scripts again by $5. We on this side of the chamber will keep doing whatever we can to responsibly help Australians with the cost of living, including through more bulk-billing and cheaper medicines.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East: Migration</title>
          <page.no>57</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LLEW O'BRIEN</name>
    <name.id>265991</name.id>
    <electorate>Wide Bay</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. Of the reported 43 tourist visas your government has granted and then cancelled for people from the terrorist controlled Gaza war zone since 7 October, 20 have been reinstated on appeal. Did ministerial intervention occur to support any of these 20 cases?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The member is asking me a question about ministerial intervention. There certainly has not been prime ministerial intervention.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Education: Rural and Regional Australia</title>
          <page.no>57</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CHESTERS</name>
    <name.id>249710</name.id>
    <electorate>Bendigo</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Education. What is the Albanese Labor government doing to support university students and give more people from the outer suburbs and regional Australia the chance to go to university?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CLARE</name>
    <name.id>HWL</name.id>
    <electorate>Blaxland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank my friend the absolutely sensational member for Bendigo for her question. We're wiping $3 billion of student debt for more than 3 million Australians, including almost 17,000 Australians in the member for Bendigo's electorate. That will help with the cost of degrees. We are also, for the first time, introducing paid prac to provide financial support for teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work students. That will help with the cost of living while they are at uni.</para>
<para>But we've also got to do something about the cost of young people from poor families, from the outer suburbs, from our regions and from the bush missing out on the chance to go to university at all. About one in two young people in their twenties or thirties today has a university degree, but not everywhere—not where I grew up, not in our outer suburbs, certainly not in the regions and not in the bush.</para>
<para>One way to help with that are regional university study hubs—places that bring university closer to where people live so they don't need to leave home to go to university and they don't need to travel for hours to get the skills and the qualifications that they need. When we were elected two years ago there were 34 of these hubs across the country. We're doubling that. Already we've announced 10 more, in the Pilbara, East Arnhem Land, King Island off the coast of Tassie, Innisfail, Warwick, Chinchilla, Longreach, Victor Harbor, Gippsland and Katanning. I'm pleased to advise the House that the King Island, Pilbara and Gippsland hubs have now opened and are starting to support students. These hubs work. The fact is that where they are we see enrolment in university go up and we see completions go up. Not just that; people get jobs where they live, and they build lives in the communities where they grew up.</para>
<para>Today we've announced that applications are now open for another 10 regional university study hubs. So I encourage all members who represent regional Australia, who represent the bush, to work with your local councils, work with universities and put an application form in. I ask members of the Liberal Party to pay close attention here: applications close on 18 October 2024, to be more specific, at 5 pm. It will be daylight saving by then, so that's 5 pm eastern daylight time. Remember to put your clocks forward, not back. You've got a 58-day warning. I hope that's enough time for the Liberal Party. I'm happy to table all of those details for the benefit of the New South Wales Liberal Party. It's all part of building a better and fairer education system.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Security</title>
          <page.no>57</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELL</name>
    <name.id>282981</name.id>
    <electorate>Moncrieff</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, why have we fast-tracked visas for nearly 3,000 people from the terrorist-controlled Gaza war zone since 7 October, yet our allies like the UK have taken in 168 and the United States only 17? Many comparable countries require face-to-face interviews in third countries or biometric tests to apply for a visa, conditions the Albanese government has waived. Was this decision based on security advice or political expediency?</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The minister for infrastructure will cease interjecting before the Prime Minister has begun.</para>
<para>Government members interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! Members on my right will cease interjecting immediately.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>All visitor visa applications—and this goes to a previous question as well—are decided with the involvement of departmental staff. None are fully automated. We have dealt with this process as people would be aware, and I'm sure the member is aware. The Rafah border crossing is closed. Those opposite said nothing about these issues when the visas were actually being introduced. Now they're not being delivered because people can't get out of the Rafah crossing—and those opposite know that. But that's not the real point of this question, is it? It's not to get an answer. It's not actually to get information. It's to sow doubt and to stoke division and to create fear, and everyone knows it.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The Minister for Industry and Science, it's highly disorderly to interject before I take a point of order. 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>It goes to relevance. The question was very straightforward. Was this decision based on security advice or political expediency? Very simple.</para>
<para>Government members interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! Members on my right, the same principles will apply as they did for the member for Wannon. The Leader of the House.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Burke</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The last two words that were just quoted show exactly why this answer is in order, because he is referring to the political expediency that is dealing with question after question for processes that were the same as have been used in Australia for years.</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The member for Wannon is entitled to raise a point of order. This question was different as it didn't specifically ask for a fact or a figure, which we've been dealing with during the week. It was a very different question, with a question regarding political expediency at the end. If you're going to ask a question about that topic, obviously the Prime Minister, or a minister, is able to respond regarding that issue.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm certainly speaking about the political expediency of those opposite—political expediency that isn't concerned about cost-of-living pressures, that's not concerned about jobs, that's not concerned about wages, that's not concerned about our economy, that's not concerned about social policy, that's not concerned about the environment or tackling climate change or any of the issues that Australians are talking about in their households. It is more concerned about the Middle East than Middle Australia. This exposes their political expediency, because they don't have an agenda. They're yet to come up with a single costed policy. I think that people will be having a look at this bloke, who, ever since he walked into the parliament as a new member, has always looked to divide, has always looked to bring Australians apart, not to bring Australians together. Even when he has left this parliament, as he did during the apology, it was all about divisions—and then he apologised for it. He said that Lebanese migration was a mistake under the Fraser government, and then he said he apologised for it. It's just that he apologised to Annabel Crabb, not to anyone in the Lebanese community. He hasn't yet apologised to Africans in Melbourne, for when he said that people couldn't get out. He continually looks to pretend that he is so strong, but nastiness is not strength. Punching down on vulnerable people is not strength. But that is what this bloke does. It shows Australia who he really is every day.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I just remind all members regarding reflecting on members during the course of answers and questions.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cost of Living: Women</title>
          <page.no>58</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:30</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 Early Childhood Education. How is the Albanese Labor government delivering cost-of-living relief for highly feminised sectors, including for early childhood education educators and teachers?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr ALY</name>
    <name.id>13050</name.id>
    <electorate>Cowan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Canberra for her question. At least on this side we care to ask questions about early childhood education and care and feminised industries. Labor came to government in 2022 with a commitment to drive action to close the gender pay gap. Since then, we have seen the gender pay gap drop to an all-time low. Last week, ABS data showed that the national gender pay gap has fallen to 11.5 per cent. That's down from 14.1 per cent in May 2022. That's not by accident. It didn't fall out of a coconut tree, so to speak. We are closing the gender pay gap by taking deliberate and carefully considered action. The action taken by this Albanese Labor government is working across the economy to lift women's pay.</para>
<para>In low-paid, highly feminised sectors like early childhood education, where women make up over 90 per cent of the workforce, we have supported three wage increases since we came into government. Earlier this month, I am proud to say that we announced an historic 15 per cent pay increase for early childhood education and care workers. This increase means that, by the end of this year, 200,000 early childhood education and care workers will get a pay rise of at least $100 a week and, by the end of next year, that will be at least $150 a week. That's because this government believes in giving these critical early childhood education workers, who are highly skilled and highly qualified, the fair and decent wages that they deserve.</para>
<para>This $3.6 billion investment towards a wage increase will make a real difference. It will make a real difference on gender equality and it will help to ease cost-of-living pressures, something that we on this side of the House have been focused on. Georgie Dent, the CEO of The Parenthood, said that this is:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… momentous for gender equity as it directly addresses the chronic undervaluing of a highly feminised workforce, and bolsters a critical enabler of women's workforce participation.</para></quote>
<para>This wage increase is good for children, it is good for families, it is good for the economy and, importantly, it is good for women, most of whom are still primary caregivers, because it allows them to make that choice of what works best for them when it comes to returning to work, taking on further hours or returning to study. It's part of this government's plan for a universal early childhood education and care system that works for the economy, children, families and women.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East: Migration</title>
          <page.no>59</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
    <electorate>Wannon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. Will the Prime Minister concede that, in cutting corners on security assessments to bring in 1,300 people from the terrorist controlled Gaza war zone on tourist visas, he has made Australia less safe? Will the Prime Minister admit that his visa for votes scheme was only done to shore up votes in the seats of Watson, McMahon and Blaxland, and doesn't this go to his true character?</para>
<para>Government members interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! Because there was far too much noise, there is a part of the question I want to clarify. The Leader of the House?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Burke</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I raise an issue on questions containing imputations against members and containing imputations on motivations.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Yes. I'm just going to ask that that part of the question be withdrawn or rephrased.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>No, just withdraw that part.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>You don't want me to change the question? You want me to—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Just withdraw the inference.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>No, that's fine. I withdraw that component of it.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The member for Cooper is warned. I'm dealing with a point of order that the Leader of the House has raised. That's highly disorderly. I thank the member for Wannon. The Prime Minister has the call.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm asked a question about character from those opposite, and I'm happy to answer it by beginning—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>He promised to smile more, but there's just more abuse. Let me begin by quoting a character, Robert Menzies. This is what he had to say:</para>
<quote><para class="block">It is a good thing that Australia should have earned a reputation for a sensitive understanding of the problems of people in other lands, that we should not come to be regarded as people who are detached from the miseries of the world. I know that we will not come to be so regarded, for I believe that there are no people anywhere with warmer hearts and more generous impulses.</para></quote>
<para>That was the founder of the Liberal Party. He wouldn't recognise this mob today. He would not recognise them.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Husic</name>
    <name.id>91219</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>They'd call him a teal.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Minister for Industry and Science will cease interjecting.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>There was a time when the Liberal Party would have seen people fleeing, whether they were fleeing Ukraine, Israel, Syria, Vietnam or Gaza at the moment, and would have had some understanding that this was the worst time to try to malign a whole group of people who are suffering enormously. It's something that we see on our TV screens every night. This morning, if you turned on the radio, the latest hit was a school in Gaza, with real people devastated and losing their lives.</para>
<para>When it comes to security processes, we have faith in our intelligence agencies. They work. Our security and law enforcement agencies do their job on an ongoing basis. We have faith in them. The opposition apparently don't, even though they're the same security agencies and, indeed, the same personnel.</para>
<para>We talk about character when it comes to targeting groups. Whether it is the Lebanese, people in the South Pacific, the Chinese or the entire continent of Africa, they're all fair game. If you're an au pair from Europe and someone can pick up the phone, no problem—you're in.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Jones</name>
    <name.id>A9B</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Ministerial interference!</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The Assistant Treasurer is warned. I'm trying to hear from the member for Hasluck, and these continual interjections—the member for Hasluck will just pause and resume her seat. The Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Fletcher</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>There was a highly objectionable imputation made by the Prime Minister, and he should withdraw it.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I was listening closely at the end of the statement, the final part of that question, and a person wasn't named directly regarding that.</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>No. Just to assist the Manager of Opposition Business, just so we're clear, if someone had said a person's name—I'm not going to identify anyone here—and said, 'This person had done this, or, 'This person had done that,' they would have been made to withdraw. I'm just going to remind all members that language is important.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Fletcher</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, what's also important is if there are consistent standards applied to both—</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Leader of the House on the point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Burke</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Just on the point of order, to be of assistance to the Manager of Opposition Business: the point of order that was earlier taken that requested the withdrawal was based on standing order 100, which applies only to rules for questions.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I remind all members, with their questions and answers, to respect and reflect the standing orders.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Veterans</title>
          <page.no>60</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:39</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 Veterans' Affairs. What will the Albanese Labor government's reforms to veterans' entitlements mean for Australian veterans?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KEOGH</name>
    <name.id>249147</name.id>
    <electorate>Burt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Hasluck for her question and her tremendous advocacy, as a veteran herself, on behalf of the veterans in her community. The Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide found in its interim report that the veterans' entitlement system 'is so complicated that it adversely affects the mental health of some veterans'. That's because there are three different complex pieces of legislation that provide the support system for our veteran community, and some veterans can be covered by all three of those pieces of legislation.</para>
<para>The first recommendation of the interim report of the royal commission was that the government get on with harmonising and simplifying this legislation that supports our veterans. Over the last two years, we have been consulting with the veteran community, families and experts, holding roundtables and webinars around the country, to make sure that we could undertake this very important task. We put forward a proposal that featured establishing an improved Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act as a sole single ongoing scheme, closing out the old Veterans' Entitlements Act and the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation (Defence-Related Claims) Act to any new claims, and grandparenting all existing arrangements to ensure that there's no reduction in entitlements for those who currently receive or have previously received benefits as veterans.</para>
<para>Last month I introduced the Veterans' Entitlements, Treatment and Support (Simplification and Harmonisation) Bill—the VETS bill—to bring forth this new regime to support our veteran community under a single act. This will see an additional $222 million worth of benefits flow to veterans and families in just the first two years of operation of this new model. Critically, this will make it easier for veterans and families to understand what they're entitled to, it will make it easier for advocates to work supporting the veteran community in making claims, and it will make it quicker for the Department of Veterans' Affairs to process those claims so veterans and families get what they need and are entitled to in a timely way.</para>
<para>This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity for all of us across this parliament to improve the circumstances and the supports for our veterans. I want to thank all of the veterans, the families and the experts that have come together as part of the consultation and have given their frank and fearless advice so that we can get this right. I really appreciate the work that they have done to get us to this point, and I encourage everyone to come together to support this legislation so that we can provide a better future for our veterans and families.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Housing</title>
          <page.no>60</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SPENDER</name>
    <name.id>286042</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Treasurer. Housing is a critical need, but the industry and now the RBA are saying that record public non-energy infrastructure is putting pressure on inputs and wages and that homebuilding is becoming uneconomic. With productivity in the sector stagnant, something's got to give. What is the government doing to slow non-essential infrastructure spending and allow capacity to return to the sector so we can get on with building homes?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr CHALMERS</name>
    <name.id>37998</name.id>
    <electorate>Rankin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you to the member for Wentworth for her question. I know that she won't mind me also shouting out to my friends from the BAPS community who are in the gallery today. I wear this nadachadi in your honour, as you know. I wanted to shout out to, in particular, my friend Jaynesh, who's had a few health challenges in recent times. It is so wonderful to see you here, my friend—to see you healthy. It was lovely to see you on Saturday as well for India Day. I welcome you all. You are a reminder of the wonderful contribution that our faith communities make in the local areas that are represented here in the people's house.</para>
<para>I say to the member for Wentworth that I do acknowledge and understand the legitimate concerns that she raises about the pressure in the building industry, whether it's residential housing or large-scale infrastructure. The government's view is that we need to build housing and infrastructure, not housing or infrastructure, and that one can enable the other, and we're focused on both. Here I want to give a shout-out to the infrastructure minister and the housing ministers, old and new, for the great work that they are doing to try to manage the pressures that the member for Wentworth legitimately raises.</para>
<para>There's a number that really jumps out of the most recent CPI data, as the member would appreciate, and that is the 5.1 per cent inflation when it comes to the construction sector. The construction sector is a big part of the CPI basket, and 5.1 per cent is obviously too high. This is the issue that the member for Wentworth is rightly identifying.</para>
<para>I think there are three things that matter most when it comes to managing these pressures but also attending to this productivity challenge that we've had in our economy for too long, something that the member for Wentworth has raised in other forums as well. The first thing is to manage the infrastructure pipeline in an intelligent way. The infrastructure minister manages that $120 billion pipeline in a way that makes sure that we can actually build what we are committed to building. The minister has done a heap of good work in that regard. Some of that involves difficult decisions around reprofiling, retiming and resequencing different projects, but it's important work and we take it very seriously. The second thing is managing the skilled migration program in an intelligent way. Again, that's a big focus of this side of the House. Thirdly, and most importantly, I think, it's about skills. If you could fix one thing that would help us to build more infrastructure and more housing—not more infrastructure or more housing—it would be to train more Australian workers in this really important sector.</para>
<para>Here I want to acknowledge the new skills minister but also, after his wonderful valedictory yesterday, the outgoing skills minister for the work that he has done on fee-free TAFE, working closely with the PM and others. We need more workers in this sector. If we get more workers and train them better they will be more productive and help us build the housing and the infrastructure that local communities right around Australia, including in your own community, desperately need.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Paid Parental Leave</title>
          <page.no>61</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LAXALE</name>
    <name.id>299174</name.id>
    <electorate>Bennelong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Social Services. How is the Albanese Labor government's record investment in paid parental leave supporting Australian families? What approaches has the government rejected?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RISHWORTH</name>
    <name.id>HWA</name.id>
    <electorate>Kingston</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'd like to thank the member for Bennelong for his question and his tireless advocacy for families right across his community. From its first day in government, the Albanese Labor government has been working hard to improve paid parental leave for working families because, on this side of the House, we know that improving paid parental leave is a critical reform. We know paid parental leave is vital to the health and wellbeing of families, parents and children. Not only is it good for families but it's also good for our economy. One of the best ways to boost productivity and workforce participation is to provide more choice and more support for families and more opportunity for women.</para>
<para>Each year, around 180,000 families across the country will benefit from our government's investment in paid parental leave, which totals a $2.3 billion investment across our three budgets. First we made the Paid Parental Leave scheme more accessible and flexible and we encouraged shared care. Then we passed legislation to expand the scheme to a full six months by 2026. But, of course, we are not stopping there. Tomorrow, I will introduce legislation to the House to pay superannuation on government paid parental leave. Not only is our government providing immediate support to Australians with a new baby, but we are boosting their retirement savings. Our reforms on paid parental leave have been widely welcomed, including by The Parenthood, who said this is a 'significant improvement' after 'no meaningful change' to policy over the last decade.</para>
<para>I have been asked about what approaches have been rejected. Of course, the approach that we have rejected is the approach that those opposite took when they were in government. The Leader of the Opposition was part of a cabinet which, over two successive terms in government, attempted to cut $1 billion from Paid Parental Leave and take that from the pockets of families. Their policy to cut Paid Parental Leave went beyond just bad policy, though. Those opposite showed their true attitudes towards working women when they accused them of being double-dippers, fraudsters and rorters for just having the gall to access both their Paid Parental Leave and their workplace entitlements. Their lack of understanding about the importance of paid parental leave for women's workforce participation still prevails and, in response to our improvements, we've seen Senator Paterson and Senator Hume characterise paid parental leave as welfare as opposed to a workplace entitlement. Those opposite have nothing positive to offer. Only Labor will get up and improve paid parental leave.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The minister's time has concluded.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East: Migration</title>
          <page.no>62</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HAMILTON</name>
    <name.id>291387</name.id>
    <electorate>Groom</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, why is Australia handing out tourist visas to Gazans from a terrorist controlled war zone in an average of 24 hours and, in some cases, as quickly as one hour, while bypassing all the usual checks, including those that the former coalition government used in Syria? Will the Prime Minister admit that the government's visas for votes scheme was only done to shore up votes in the seats of Watson, McMahon and Blaxland?</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>If someone is on their feet I always give them the courtesy; you don't need to tell me who I'm calling or not, Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the House, on a point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Burke</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, as you previously ruled, under standing order 100 there is a rule on imputations that doesn't apply elsewhere in debate. You ruled previously that, when it was used in a question, that exact phrase is not appropriate. It's now being used deliberately in defiance of that ruling.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Manager of Opposition Business, on a point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Fletcher</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, the first point to make is that this was a question about the government's policy settings. There was no reference to any individual. This was a question about the government's policy settings. The standing order that the Leader of the House refers to is one that the government flouts on numerous occasions. For example, the question asked of the Minister for Health and Aged Care after decades of cuts and neglect. Let's have a consistent approach, Mr Speaker, to the questions asked by both sides.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm going to deal with this in an orderly and respectful way. We don't need commentary from the sidelines. I'm going to ask the member to state the question again because I didn't hear the full question. I want to make sure it's within standing orders and that, within the question, there are no reflections on any ministers or individuals.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HAMILTON</name>
    <name.id>291387</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Prime Minister, why is Australia handing out tourist visas to Gazans from a terrorist controlled war zone in an average of 24 hours and, in some cases, as quickly as one hour, while bypassing all the usual checks, including those the former coalition government used in Syria? Will the Prime Minister admit that the government's visas for votes scheme was only done to shore up votes in the seats of Watson, McMahon and Blaxland?</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! There's a collective imputation, but I'm going to allow the Prime Minister to answer the question.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:53</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>More people came from Syria under visitor visas when they were in government, when ISIS was in charge of a large amount of Syria, than the 1,300 people who have come from the occupied Palestinian territories. Can I note this as well: there have been 5,491 visitor visas granted from Israel as well. And let me say this: those people are welcome here.</para>
<para>What is going on here is so obvious, and the member for Groom is certainly very conscious of it. You know it's a shocker when no-one on the frontbench will ask you. It goes up the back, in order to sledge a whole group of people who live in Western Sydney. I say this to those opposite: you can continue to sledge people in Western Sydney. What I'll continue to do as Prime Minister is represent the entire nation, including the good people of Western Sydney. They know that we take the same advice from the same security agencies, as the previous government did. We've rejected more than 7,000 visa applications. They also know—the member for Groom mightn't know, because he just asked the question he was given, so I don't blame him—that the Rafah Border Crossing is controlled by the Israeli and Egyptian authorities and it has been closed since May. But the member for Groom didn't come here from anywhere in the Middle East. Well, while people were coming in from the Middle East, under the previous government, the member for Groom wasn't here, to be fair, otherwise maybe he would have been asking questions in parliament about—</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 left and right will cease. The Minister for Social Services will cease interjecting so I can hear 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>This goes to relevance. The question is: why is Australia handing out tourist visas to Gazans from a terrorist controlled war zone in an average of 24 hours?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Deputy Leader of the House, on a point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Butler</name>
    <name.id>HWK</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>He didn't require the question to be reworded, but it was a wide-ranging sledge. Surely any answer that the Prime Minister gives is able to come within the contours of that sledge of a question.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question at the end was about shoring up votes and a question around that type of nature, particularly electorates, which the Prime Minister was referring to about Western Sydney, of course, is being directly relevant. Just make sure that, if he's talking about electorates, perhaps he can go into greater detail about the electorates. But, if you're going to ask a question that has a political—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I know, the Member for Groom, you're not in trouble. Just for the member for Wannon: if you don't like the answer, I can appreciate that. It's not appropriate just to take a point of order if you don't like the answer. The Prime Minister has the call.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I say this to the good people of Watson, Blaxland and McMahon: we will respect every one of you, regardless of who you are, regardless of your faith, regardless of your ethnicity. We won't vilify you, we won't attack you, we won't undermine you because we understand that strong people don't have to tell people how strong they are; bullies do.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Housing</title>
          <page.no>63</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REPACHOLI</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government. How is the Albanese Labor government's Housing Support Program helping to make housing more affordable by getting more homes built more quickly in the right places?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CATHERINE KING</name>
    <name.id>00AMR</name.id>
    <electorate>Ballarat</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Hunter very much for that question. He's another great regional member on this side of the House. We understand that people are under pressure and that some people are doing it tough. Our No. 1 priority, which is exercising us every day, is delivering cost-of-living relief through tax cuts, energy bill relief and pay rises. We know that one of the keys to addressing the cost of living is bringing down the cost of owning or renting a home, and that means building more houses and increasing supply.</para>
<para>When I meet with councils in communities around the country—and I acknowledge the South-East Queensland councils that I met with earlier today—one of the things that they tell me is a big barrier to getting more houses built is getting local planning right and constructing the infrastructure needed to support new homes. That's why we have put $1.5 billion on the table to unlock the housing supply pipeline over the next two years.</para>
<para>The Prime Minister recently announced $50 million to help local and state governments get local planning rights to fund projects like a new strategy for Blacktown City Council to build more well-located housing around train stations, planning to build more homes around Bundaberg Hospital to ensure healthcare workers have affordable places to live close to where they work, funding to bring back a planning degree in South Australia to ensure that we actually have the workforce to give planning approvals and investing in the planning and servicing works needed to bring more housing online in six wheat belt areas across Western Australia. I know that bringing on new housing means getting the local planning right upfront. That's because we know that good planning matters, from planning new homes to, of course, planning to submit your local council nomination forms on time.</para>
<para>Just last Friday, the next round of the Housing Support Program closed for applications. There is $450 million available to local, state and territory governments for that enabling infrastructure. We'll fund new investment to build the roads and connect the power, water and sewerage to support residential construction. We'll also provide funding for community infrastructure like parks and public spaces to support those new homes. We don't want to just approve homes sitting on the books; we want sods turned on those homes right now. That $450 million will make a significant difference.</para>
<para>Of course, in the budget we also provided $1 billion across states and territories to deliver new infrastructure to support housing supply and to deliver more social housing via the priority works stream. States and territories will submit their implementation plans to me by next month. We are committed to building more homes across this country, and we are committed to building the infrastructure to enable those new homes in our cities, our suburbs and our regions.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fossil Fuel Industry</title>
          <page.no>64</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BANDT</name>
    <name.id>M3C</name.id>
    <electorate>Melbourne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. Labor has approved 23 coal and gas projects and is giving $1½ billion to the gas-expanding Middle Arm precinct. Will you work with the Greens to ensure a future made in Australia isn't a future for more coal and gas but, instead, one that supports public ownership and a national critical minerals reserve so Australians get their fair share of the future? What's more important to you, Prime Minister: passing your bill or opening more coal and gas mines?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for his question. It's on a day when we have approved, through the environment minister, Australia's biggest renewable energy project ever, but does the Leader of the Australian Greens talk about that? No. 'No, we won't worry about that.' Does he talk about the fact that manufacturing jobs are also going to be created because of Australia's largest ever renewable energy project? No. They are too busy out there preparing to vote once again with the coalition to block the Future Made in Australia legislation.</para>
<para>I'll say this about a future made in Australia: we have enormous opportunities that we can seize from the transition to net zero, and one of the things that people who are looking at large-scale renewable energy, such as Rio Tinto there in Gladstone, talk about is the need for firming capacity so that they can shift to net zero. They see that gas has a role to play in that. The Leader of the Australian Greens can pretend that that's not the case and deny that that investment is occurring, or he can actually get with the program of a real plan to deliver the transition to net zero in a way that sees us deliver the reduction that we need to have—43 per cent by 2030 and then net zero by 2050.</para>
<para>The Sun Cable project that was approved today in the Northern Territory is expected to deliver more than $20 billion in economic value to the Northern Territory and support an average of 6,800 direct and indirect jobs for each year of the construction phase, with a peak workforce of 14,300 in that area. He might know as well that Middle Arm has a role in that export. Middle Arm, by having an industrial precinct in the Northern Territory, has a role in the shift that needs to occur and that is occurring.</para>
<para>So I say to the member for Melbourne that he should support the Future Made in Australia plan, he should support Australian jobs and he should support Australian manufacturing. We'll wait and see, but we're quite happy for him to get on board and, indeed, for the coalition to get on board as well, making more things here because we need a more resilient economy as we take advantage of the shift in the global economy. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Telecommunications</title>
          <page.no>64</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr NEUMANN</name>
    <name.id>HVO</name.id>
    <electorate>Blair</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Communications. How is the Albanese Labor government working with industry to ensure the 3G switchover is conducted with public safety at the centre?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms ROWLAND</name>
    <name.id>159771</name.id>
    <electorate>Greenway</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for his question, because he understands the importance of mobile connectivity, especially in the regions and particularly when it comes to access to emergency services. Australians have always been early adopters, and the government supports all Australians having access to the very best services. Improvements in mobile coverage, capacity and speed only arrive through innovation, the efficient use of spectrum and the rollout of successive generations of mobile technologies. But, from 2G to CDMA and now 3G, each of these network upgrades must be done in a safe way.</para>
<para>The 3G switchover impacts devices in different ways. There are devices that rely solely on 3G, including 3G-only handsets, some EFTPOS machines and some personal and medical alarms. 3G-only handsets won't be able to make any calls after the switchover, and that will be apparent to end users; however, there are a subset of handsets which use 4G for voice and data but are configured by the manufacturer to use 3G for calls to triple 0. This category of handset is of concern because it won't be apparent to end users that they can't call triple 0, and they'd only discover this during an emergency when they're actually trying to make the call.</para>
<para>So, following interrogation by my department earlier this year, industry figures showed that up to 740,000 devices in this category may be impacted. On receiving the advice as to the scale, I immediately stood up an industry working group overseen by my department. That enabled fortnightly updates on device numbers and progress on community and customer outreach efforts. The cooperation by the working group enables me now to advise the House that the number of devices in this high-risk category has reduced from 740,000 to around 73,000. That's a significant reduction, but both government and industry believe there is more to be done.</para>
<para>To that end, the government welcomes the announcement by Telstra and Optus that they will delay their respective 3G network switchovers until 28 October. I also welcome them undertaking a joint public safety mass marketing campaign to raise consumer awareness. I thank the CEO of Telstra, Vicki Brady, and the acting CEO of Optus, Michael Venter, for their constructive engagement with the government on these issues.</para>
<para>It's also important for users of connected devices, like medical monitors, to check their compatibility by contacting their manufacturer or supplier. I urge all customers to check if their mobile devices are impacted by simply texting the numeral 3 to the number 3498.</para>
<para>Finally, options exist for the government to consider regulatory intervention, including potential proposals for future delays to the switchover if they're warranted and in the public interest. Any such actions will be subject to consultation and procedural processes.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Albanese</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>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>QUESTIONS TO THE SPEAKER</title>
        <page.no>65</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS TO THE SPEAKER</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Parliamentary Standards</title>
          <page.no>65</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SPENDER</name>
    <name.id>286042</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to ask the Speaker to make a statement on behaviour in the House. In this parliament, we have a behaviour code, soon to be legislated, that requires parliamentarians to 'treat all those with whom they come into contact in the course of their parliamentary duties and activities with dignity, courtesy, fairness and respect.' The conduct that is demonstrated in this chamber, particularly during question time, is unlike any workplace I've ever been in, and I think we would have a hard time convincing the public, including those perhaps in the gallery today, that we comply with this code. I would like to ask the Speaker to review the behaviour, language and standards in recent weeks and make any necessary statements relating to them.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Wentworth for her question. I agree with her; we must find ways to better engage in debate that maintains respectful behaviour and, in particular, upholds the standing orders. I shall reflect on standards and behaviour in recent times and report back to the member.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Questions in Writing</title>
          <page.no>65</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JOYCE</name>
    <name.id>e5d</name.id>
    <electorate>New England</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, in accordance with standing order 105(b) I wish to draw your attention to an overdue response to question in writing No. 603. On 15 May 2024, I asked the Minister for Veterans' Affairs about the Ex-Service Organisation Initiative. Mr Speaker, can I ask that you write to the minister and seek his explanation as to why he has chosen not to answer my questions within the required 60 days?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I shall do so, as the standing order provides.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DOCUMENTS</title>
        <page.no>65</page.no>
        <type>DOCUMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Presentation</title>
          <page.no>65</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
    <electorate>Watson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>These documents are tabled in accordance with the list circulated to the honourable members earlier today. Full details of the documents will be recorded in the <inline font-style="italic">Votes </inline><inline font-style="italic">and </inline><inline font-style="italic">Proceedings</inline>.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE</title>
        <page.no>65</page.no>
        <type>MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Renewable Energy</title>
          <page.no>65</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:10</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 'renewables only' policy, with industrial wind turbines, solar factories and 28,000 kilometres of new transmission lines, is ripping up agricultural land, pristine wilderness and driving up the cost of living in 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>
<para> A government member: This will be good.</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>I thank the member opposite for the compliment that, 'This will be good.' I want to read a quote to you from Sydney's <inline font-style="italic">Northern Beaches Advocate</inline> on 7 July 2020. The article is on a proposal for eight wind turbines and a one-hectare solar farm at North Head in Sydney. The proposal was made by a group called the Global Warming Solution. They're self-described as 'a community platform made up of people determined to do something about climate change'.</para>
<para>In response to an inquiry from the <inline font-style="italic">Northern Beaches Advocate</inline>, the member for Warringah, Zali Steggall, said this:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I would be doubtful that a sensitive environmental and culturally significant area like North Head is the appropriate location.</para></quote>
<para>That says everything about sanctimony corner over there with the teals and the Greens, and the sanctimony line down there of inner-city MPs. We can imagine, can't we, North Head with eight turbines on the hill there, and how much that culturally would upset sailing around Sydney Harbour, how much it would upset having a double macchiato at Sydney Bower there. We've just destroyed culturally everything that happens in Sydney. We understand how much environmental damage one hectare—not a big space—would do.</para>
<para>I don't have a problem so much that the member for Warringah and other inner-city Labor MPs and Greens have said things like that about projects in the city, but what gets me is the absolute hypocrisy of, 'Don't do it in my patch, but go hell for leather in regional and remote Australia.' That's what they're saying here.</para>
<para>It gets worse, though, because when the member for Warringah was talking about this, she was asked about proposals that were going on in Port Stephens, which is obviously up the coast a bit, and proposals in the Illawarra. You know what she said about members on this side who voiced cultural and environmental concerns about those projects? She said, 'They are scaremongering and spreading disinformation.' There is the hypocrisy of this. We can't do wind turbines and a hectare of solar panels on North Head.</para>
<para>Just to put this into perspective, with Labor's reckless renewable-only policy, do you know how many solar panels have to be built around Australia by 2030? Sixty million—not a hectare. You know how many wind turbines are needed to get to that policy? Not the eight that they were looking at on North Head, but tens of thousands. Of course, if you listen to the hypocrisy of sanctimony corner, that's okay because they can all be built in rural and regional Australia, where obviously there are no cultural or environmental issues to deal with.</para>
<para>Let's go through some of the issues that people where I live and where a lot of my colleagues live are concerned about—the tens of millions of solar panels that need to be built and the tens of thousands of wind turbines that need to be built. We do not believe that this is scaremongering and misinformation. This is about habitat loss and fragmentation. This is about disruption of bird migration. This is about ecosystem disruption. This is about soil erosion.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Repacholi</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Do you really care about that?</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HOGAN</name>
    <name.id>218019</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>We don't care about it, do we, the member for Hunter? Well, good on you. You're saying that people in the country, farmers, don't care about this? Is that what you're saying?</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! I need you to direct your comments through the chair. I will not have the personal attacks going on, okay? You can bring your remarks through me and dial it down a little bit. And no interjections from the member for Hunter.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HOGAN</name>
    <name.id>218019</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I will dim it down and direct it through you, Deputy Speaker. For the member for Hunter to say to me, to us and to people in rural and remote communities, 'When have you ever cared about the environment?' is an absolute insult to every country person. In fact, it's an insult to his own electorate. The member for Hunter has just insulted his own electorate, because he lives in regional Australia, and he said, 'When do his members ever care about the environment?' We'll let the member for Hunter's electorate know that he just said that.</para>
<para>Not only that, but we have a lot of environmental issues. We have a lot of issues about both the environment and culture. There are also massive concerns that we have about the waste disposal of these things.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm going to have to pull you up again. I'm struggling to hear you.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HOGAN</name>
    <name.id>218019</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm struggling to hear myself too.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Yes. Trust me, colleagues who think they're being helpful to the member for Page: you're not being helpful.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Member for Hunter, do not encourage this. I'd like to hear the member for Page.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HOGAN</name>
    <name.id>218019</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I think what I'm saying is quite interesting, so I wish I could hear myself. The other major issue with this that no-one has answers to—and, obviously, you don't hear the Greens talking about this, you don't hear the teal party talking about this, and you don't hear inner-city Labor MPs talking about this—is the massive disposal issue that we're going to have with wind turbines and solar panels. Of course, it doesn't matter, because they're not going to be disposed in the cities. There are a lot of environmental issues to consider there.</para>
<para>I want to give out some figures—and I'm sure some of my colleagues will give other examples of this—and some examples of one project in the Central West of New South Wales. Families were offered $5,000 to compensate for visual impacts. Of the submissions from local people received during an environmental impact statement, 96 per cent objected to the project. Insurance prices have doubled because insurance companies are now saying, 'With renewable projects next to your property, it has increased risk.'</para>
<para>The department themselves acknowledged that the construction of transmission lines would result in impacts to diversity. This particular project is dominated by agricultural land use. The project requires the permanent acquisition of 30 parcels of land for infrastructure. The people who objected raised concerns about impacts to landscape, visual amenity, agricultural land, socioeconomic factors and biodiversity. These issues are real; they are real for our communities and communities of people in rural and regional Australia. Again, with the member for Warringah, the Greens MPs and the inner-city Labor MPs, we are just scaremongering. It's just not acceptable to our communities.</para>
<para>I don't know if you remember the movie <inline font-style="italic">The </inline><inline font-style="italic">Hunger Games</inline>. In <inline font-style="italic">The Hunger Games</inline> there was the Capitol. Who lives in the Capitol? The teals live in the Capitol. The Greens MPs live in the Capitol. A lot of Labor MPs live in the Capitol with President Snow. But what do the sectors do? Sectors 8, 9 and 10 were ag. Sectors 8, 9 and 10 fed the Capitol. Sector 5—there are a lot of sector 5 people here—had the coal mines and the mining; they powered the Capitol. Don't be sector 12—they bombed sector 12. The member for Fairfax would like this: sector 13 was the nuclear sector. At least President Snow was aware of the need for nuclear.</para>
<para>I see this so much in a lot of legislation that I talk about now. There was the Murray-Darling Basin plan, which affected a lot of communities, and the live export ban. The Prime Minister thought it was a great joke last night to insult every sheep farmer in Australia about live exports, saying live exports were a terrible thing. Again, lots of legislation in this chamber is about elite city MPs—the Teals, the Greens and the inner-city Labor MPs—just saying: 'We know what's best for you to do in the rural, regional and remote communities. We'll tell you what you can do, we'll tell you what you can't do and we'll tell you how you do it.'</para>
<para>I can tell you that this issue, along with a lot of others, as I just mentioned—whether it be water issues, live export, agriculture issues or a lot of other things—has my community outraged. There was an uprising in <inline font-style="italic">The H</inline><inline font-style="italic">unger Games</inline>, and they marched on the capital. They will come and protest. The first one will be the protest to keep the sheep. Our communities have had enough of being told what to do and what they can't do.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILSON</name>
    <name.id>265970</name.id>
    <electorate>Fremantle</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I like the member for Page a lot, but that was a lot of hogwash—entertaining hogwash, colourful hogwash, sometimes angry hogwash. I don't think it was fixed in the end by the <inline font-style="italic">Hunger Games</inline> metaphor or by the 6 January capital insurrection allusion that he seemed to be making. The truth is that managing Australia's energy system at a time of change and challenge is a serious matter, and we should actually take it seriously. We take it seriously. We are taking positive action right now while setting Australia up for the long term. What does that look like? It looks like energy bill relief for every household in Australia while improving investment in renewables, storage and grid upgrades for the long term, making things better right now and making things better for the long term. Already there has been a 25 per cent increase in renewable energy, the cheapest form of new energy generation, and AEMO has consistently noted that the moderation of wholesale prices has resulted from an increase in renewables in our system.</para>
<para>The member for Page knows that, but instead what we get from the member for Page and from the opposition is disinformation, negativity, hypocrisy and fearmongering. You can come to the dispatch box and say how much you don't like being accused of all of those things, but, if you don't like it, maybe just don't do it. If you come here every day with disinformation, negativity, hypocrisy and fearmongering and you get called out for it, you can only blame yourselves. There's one other thing I'd add to that: selective amnesia.</para>
<para>The Albanese government is working to support Australian households and small businesses to deal with the pressures that built up through a decade of neglect, and the member for Page seems to have forgotten that already. I don't think the Australian community has forgotten. We inherited six per cent inflation from those opposite. We came to government just after the highest quarter of inflation this country has experienced in two decades. We now have inflation with a three in front of it. We inherited an energy system that in the previous nine years actually went backwards by one gigawatt in overall generation capability—this from a nine -year-old government that never even managed an energy policy, from a government that stifled investment in the cheapest form of new energy generation. They tried to defund and abolish the Australian Renewable Energy Agency and the Clean Energy Finance Company. They never brought in legislation to help reform Australia's energy system one iota, but the now shadow Treasurer, the former minister for energy, did seek to change regulation at the last moment to hide a massive spike in wholesale prices.</para>
<para>The member for Page might like to engage in some selective amnesia; that might be something that all those in the Liberal and National parties want to do. But I don't think you can come along with some sort of magic wand and expect the Australian community to go in for the same kind of exercise. The Australian community will not forget the fact that, for nine years, those opposite couldn't manage a national energy policy, that they saw a reduction in energy capacity, that they sought to cut and nobble investment in renewable energy. We are dealing with those consequences now. We are cleaning up that mess right now.</para>
<para>When they flipped into opposition after a decade of doing nothing to prepare Australia's energy system but doing plenty to stifle investment and innovation, they continued to bring in this approach of negativity, disinformation, hypocrisy and amnesia. They voted against price caps. They voted against energy price relief. They have opposed our energy efficiency packages for small and medium enterprises. As I said, there's been misinformation, disinformation, negativity, hypocrisy and fearmongering.</para>
<para>I am going to show the member for Page and his MPI a bit more respect than he and his colleagues are showing to the Australian people because I will actually address some of the hogwash in this MPI topic. The Albanese government, through the work of the Minister for Climate Change and Energy, is absolutely focused on upgrading our transmission grid. It's been needed for some time. Those opposite know that upgrading our transmission grid wasn't just related to the energy transformation and to the need to enable more renewables and storage into our grid. It was required because the transmission grid is old. It's been around for decades. It's been neglected in many parts of Australia. It needs to be upgraded.</para>
<para>Here's a statement on that topic that I think should interest those opposite:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The development of interconnectors and transmission is critical to bringing new generation capacity into the energy system, while shoring up reliability and affordability across state borders.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Thousands of kilometres of new transmission is likely to be needed to connect new generation, and deliver reliable and affordable energy across the national market.</para></quote>
<para>That makes a lot of sense to me. Who do you reckon said that in 2022? It was the now shadow Treasurer. It was the then minister for energy in the coalition government. Did they actually do any of that? Did they plan for any of that or fund any of that? No. But that was the view of the now shadow Treasurer in March 2022—that thousands of kilometres of new transmission was likely to be needed to connect new generation and deliver reliable and affordable energy across the national market. Well, knock me down with a feather. That is what this government is doing. That's what those opposite failed to do for nine long years. We are doing that because that is what the system needs. It needed it irrespective of the introduction of new renewable and storage technology, but it certainly needs it to enable that, and that is the fastest path to cheaper power in this country.</para>
<para>The member for Page doesn't mind actually having in the text of the MPI reference to 28,000 kilometres of new transmission lines. He knows that that is rubbish. The integrated system plan has identified 4,000 kilometres of new transmission lines and 1,000 kilometres of upgrades to existing transmission lines. The member for Page knows that, but he comes in here with a number of 28,000. Why? Because he wants to scare Australians. He wants people in regional and rural Australia to be concerned about something which is absolutely rubbish. That is something that we will call out at every turn.</para>
<para>When it comes to this government, we take responsibility for what this country needs. This country cannot go along with an energy system that was left in tatters by those opposite, that went backwards on renewable energy generation, that had no investment in grid upgrades and that tried to quash and suppress renewables and storage when the rest of the world is going down that path. We are going to clean up the mess. We are not pursuing, as they like to call it, a renewable-energy-only policy. That tricky phrase could reduce a whole range of technologies and measures to a single thing. We are supporting investment in the cheapest forms of energy, with storage and transmission technology, across a whole range of different areas—solar, hydro, offshore and onshore wind, geothermal batteries, pumped hydro and so it goes. We are doing that because all of the economics and engineering shows that that is how you make power cheaper, that's how you reduce emissions and that's how you make sure Australia, but particularly regional and rural Australia, benefits from the global energy transition in which we have significant comparative advantages. The rest of the world is going that way. We ignore that at our peril. The advantages for rural and regional Australia are really considerable.</para>
<para>It would have been nice if, during nine years behind the wheel, those opposite had bothered to do anything on that front, if they'd bothered to even have just one national energy policy or if they'd bothered to add just one watt of new energy generation to the system, instead of seeing a gigawatt leave the system. The only bright new idea that they have after nine years of nothing is this nuclear fantasy. That's the one idea. They never did anything to our grid system or to transmission and never did anything in relation to renewables, interconnectors or storage—any of those things.</para>
<para>Now they finally come along with this fantastic solution of nuclear policy. I don't know if you can call it a policy. We don't know how much it will cost. We don't know when the reactors will be built. We don't know what kind of reactors they'll be. We don't know who will build them. We don't know how much energy they will produce. What we do know is that it's the most expensive form of new energy generation. We know it will be entirely taxpayer funded. We know it will put massive costs on every Australian household and on every Australian business. We know that it will decrease the capacity of future Australian governments to invest in health, education, pensions and our defence forces. We know that it will require emergency buffer zones around every single reactor.</para>
<para>We know it will involve the supply of iodine tablets to every single person who lives within those 50-, 60- to 70-kilometre-radius buffer zones. We know it will have to go on the title of people's properties. We know that it will make Australia less energy resilient. We know that it will make us dependent on the countries that build those reactors and supply their materials, because it's certainly not something we're going to do here. We know that much about their policy. We know that it is absolutely the wrong direction for Australia. The Albanese government is going to continue to deliver a cheaper and cleaner energy future for this country.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JOYCE</name>
    <name.id>e5d</name.id>
    <electorate>New England</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Campbells Bridge and Maxwell, in New England—you could just about say the whole of the area—as well as Central Queensland and Clarke Creek: all these places are becoming part of the battle.</para>
<para><inline font-style="italic">An opposition member interjecting</inline>—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JOYCE</name>
    <name.id>e5d</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Yes, HumeLink. All these places have become part of the battle for our rights in regional Australia. If the member for Fremantle had been present in the halls that we go to, he would hear people say that they feel that they've been completely usurped of their rights, where billionaires have come in and basically schmoozed their way to take the rights away from individuals. If they had the temerity to say, 'Well, we're going to put these swindle factories off the coast of Fremantle,' we could do that. We could have the Fremantle doctor come in, but, no, they won't do that. When you say, 'Well, you could put them off Bondi. They'd work perfectly well there,' no, they won't do that. When you say, 'You could put them in Middle Head. They would work well there,' no, they won't do that.</para>
<para>These swindle factories and these fields of photovoltaic black have all the aesthetic pleasure and the electronic efficacy of a dog fouling your lawn in the morning, yet we have to put up with them. You talk about what happens with nuclear. If you gave us the conditions that you propose for them, then we would have so much more to say and people would be able to ventilate these issues. What you have done in places such as St Arnaud and what you are doing is schmoozing your way and saying how good and how virtuous it is. But, when we say, 'If you believe it's virtuous, why don't you underwrite the dismantling and rehabilitation of the land? Why don't you look after the environment and underwrite their dismantling and rehabilitation, like you would have to if it were a coalmine?' they say: 'No, we're not doing that. That remains with the farmer.'</para>
<para>It's $600,000 a tower. Where does that come from? Their own former ombudsman Andrew Dyer. What farmer do you think has $600,000 a tower? None. So what's going to happen to the countryside? It will become a wasteland. What happens before that? The banks turn up and say, 'We're going to have to impair this asset because you have a contingent liability resting against it.' If you believe that's wrong, do something about it. Come in here and pass the legislation that says you will underwrite the dismantling. But, no, you won't do that. This is a swindle. This is a rip-off. This is wrong.</para>
<para>I'll tell you why it's wrong. It's because at the end of this are billionaires collecting this money and these multinational companies ripping off the Australian citizen. They are being underwritten in secret agreements and capital investment schemes, which we can't get the details about because of commercial in confidence and them not telling us. Basically, it is a free kick in front of the post. You underwrite a billionaire from overseas to build a swindle factory. You underwrite it; you pay for it! But guess who does pay for it? At the end of this is a pensioner. At the end of this is a person who can't afford their power bill. At the end of this is an economy—</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Member for New England, you do not have the call. Order! Again, you're really escalating the level of noise here, and I genuinely would like to hear the member for New England, so I'm going to give him the call and ask everyone to stop the interjections.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JOYCE</name>
    <name.id>e5d</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>On the positive side, they're starting to fall over. Doughboy Mountain has fallen over, and Watsons Creek. As people are becoming aware of their legal liability, they're pulling out. Today, in the renew economy, we have two new ones, Carisbrook and Morgan, falling over. All of a sudden, there's the realisation of this swindle, of this rip-off, of this infliction on the people who are doing it tough. We have people in our area who are off the grid. Power prices went up by six per cent in the last quarter. If they hadn't had their so-called subsidies, it would have been more than 12 per cent. That is a sign of complete and utter disaster, which is the Labor Party's power policy.</para>
<para>The other day, the Prime Minister, when I said that if it were a success, it would have manufacturers lined up to come into Australia, quoted Siemens and Krups. They're not coming to Australia; they're exporting vehicles to Australia. This is it. We are hurting poor people. We are driving our economy into the dirt, and we are inflicting a blight on regional people that urban areas would never, ever accept.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GOSLING</name>
    <name.id>245392</name.id>
    <electorate>Solomon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I am absolutely delighted to have the opportunity to speak about the Albanese Labor government's reliable renewables plan in this MPI. This morning, I visited the Majura Community Energy Project with the Minister for the Environment and Water. We announced the environmental approvals for Sun Cable. Sun Cable is a project in the Northern Territory. It is massive.</para>
<para>It was great to speak with the folks at the Majura Community Energy Project. It was commissioned in 2021. It's a 1.2-megawatt solar farm that was funded by more than 350 investors from the ACT community, who each contributed between $500 and $100,000. What an awesome community and a fantastic renewables story right here in Canberra.</para>
<para>However, with all due respect to our territorian brothers and sisters here in the ACT, the Majura project is tiny compared to Sun Cable. Sun Cable would be the biggest solar farm in Australia and one of the largest renewable projects in the whole world. The project was assessed and approved by Minister Tanya Plibersek under the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, the EPBC, and is an absolutely incredible milestone, a landmark moment, in this project's journey. This follows last month's environmental approval granted by the Northern Territory government and the NTEPA.</para>
<para>Sun Cable is one of the largest energy infrastructure projects to ever receive EPBC Act approval, covering a project footprint from the heart of the Northern Territory to Darwin and extending to the Australia-Indonesia maritime border. The potential of this project is massive. It is expected to generate up to four gigawatts of renewable energy to power new green industries in the NT. This is the equivalent of all the renewable energy currently in the NEM, the National Electricity Market, that serves the east coast and South Australia.</para>
<para>Capturing the territory's reliable sun will be economically and socially transforming for the Northern Territory. Essentially, this project turns territory sunshine—which there is heaps of—and some of the best solar radiance in the world into electricity and sends it parallel to the Stuart Highway to Darwin. It will enable a green manufacturing sector, producing renewable solar power for Darwin and for potential export to Singapore. It will include industries like green hydrogen, sustainable aviation fuels, critical minerals processing and data centres. It will generate $20 billion in economic value, almost 7,000 indirect and direct jobs a year and a peak workforce of more than 14,000. It will provide a long-term source of ongoing employment in remote areas.</para>
<para>That's the incredible thing about this: it is activating regional areas of the Northern Territory where we are desperately looking for employment opportunities, including for First Nations people in remote areas. They can stake a claim in this industry of the future, with 70 years of stable, long-term, intergenerational jobs providing intergenerational empowerment of people in those communities along the 800 kilometres of poles up to Darwin. The traditional owners and local communities have been involved in this project from the beginning and welcome the opportunities that the project will unlock. This approval, the approval that we announced this morning, comes with strict conditions to protect nature, including requirements to completely avoid important species and critical habitat. Power cables have been diverted where necessary to mitigate the environmental impacts. This project is proof that we can have it all with renewable energies in terms of reliable power. We've got all the land that we need. We can have the jobs and a good environment as well.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr WEBSTER</name>
    <name.id>281688</name.id>
    <electorate>Mallee</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I don't see Labor putting wind turbines up on the Dandenong Ranges overlooking Melbourne or out in Port Phillip Bay, and they aren't blanketing Melbourne's golf courses with black panels or erecting hulking 230-metre towers and transmission lines over people's homes in Toorak, Brighton or Malvern. I wonder why? Labor, the Greens and the teals expect regional Australians to do the heavy lifting on the energy transition, taking away our environment and tranquillity.</para>
<para>Victoria was made famous by the movie <inline font-style="italic">The Castle</inline>. Instead of an insulting $70,000 compulsory acquisition figure for the Kerrigans' family home to expand an airport, money is now being pushed on farmers for access and factory installation on their land—money that comes from taxpayers and energy bill payers during a cost-of-living crisis. Energy factory billionaires make a fortune from subsidies taken from battling Australians, throwing pensioners' money at landholders to stitch up an energy factory on their land. Some might say the Kerrigan family in the film <inline font-style="italic">The Castle</inline> should have expected an airport expansion, given they lived in sight of the runway. But our hardworking food and fibre producers on their third, fourth or fifth generation family farm live many miles from the industrial demand in the capital cities.</para>
<para>I have been proud to stand beside our farmers at their protests in my electorate and in Melbourne, and I hear they will soon be here in Canberra protesting the Albanese Labor government's radical anti-farming agenda. The National Farmers Federation's survey out this week shows three out of five farmers strongly disagree with the statement that the Albanese government understands and listens to farmers. Almost three out of four believe the Albanese government's policies are harming farming. A total of 81.6 per cent of farmers are concerned about mining or energy developments on farmland, up 5.2 per cent since last year, with 42.1 per cent very concerned. Almost three in five farmers say competing land uses from mining, infrastructure or urban expansion are having a high to medium impact on their productivity, and 72.4 per cent say the Albanese government is not doing enough to protect arable farmland.</para>
<para>In regional Victoria, the Allan Labor government's recent renewable energy zone mapping almost exclusively prioritised western Victoria and northern Victoria—specifically my electorate of Mallee and fellow coalition electorates of Nicholls, Wannon and Monash. Labor proposes conveniently avoiding the Labor held Ballarat and Bendigo electorates and Dr Haines's electorate of lndi. Labor's supposed REZ hotspots, many on low-altitude terrain and hundreds of miles from the coast, are due to 'low constraints'. What on earth do they mean by that? Low constraints are when you can connect and deliver the resource easily through existing infrastructure, yet the lowest constraints, according to Labor, are in my electorate of Mallee, where there is no transmission capacity. Landholders come to me in tears, literally, protesting at their poor treatment by proponents of the 400-kilometre, 500 kilovolt VNI West transmission line. Surely the absence of a transmission line is a high constraint. I interpret 'low constraint' as meaning there are only some farmers in the way. 'Just push that bulldozer throttle and knock those farmers over.' That's the mentality of Labor, the Greens and the teals.</para>
<para>Well, the farmers are pushing back. Their message to those opposite and the crossbench is, 'Tell 'em they're dreaming.' Farmers are locking their gates. How ironic that the farmers are defending their environments, protesting and locking gates, not the so-called environmentalist Greens or teals. Their radical socialist hard-left agenda is laid bare. It was never about the environment or the planet. The Greens and teals are about looking after their benefactors, and Labor are falling over themselves to keep up. The Nationals stand with our farmers, always have and always will.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COKER</name>
    <name.id>263547</name.id>
    <electorate>Corangamite</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Energy prices are a serious issue for households and businesses. Climate change and the urgent need to reduce emissions are also a serious issue in our regions and farming communities. The Albanese government understands this, and that's why we're acting and getting on with delivering our renewables plan, because this plan will reduce energy bills in the regions and across our nation, and it will reduce the impacts of climate change, like heatwaves, droughts, floods and fires. These climate impacts cost farmers and the agricultural sector.</para>
<para>This plan has already delivered amazing results, with wholesale energy prices now lower than when the coalition left office. We know that, when renewable energy is backed up with batteries and storage, we can enjoy affordable electricity 24/7 all year round. The Albanese government understands that the answer to lowering everyone's energy bills is for governments and businesses to build massive amounts of new solar, wind, pumped hydro and renewable storage as fast as possible, and it will deliver jobs.</para>
<para>That's why the Minister for the Environment and Water's announcement this morning is so important. Our minister has just ticked off Australia's biggest renewable energy solar project ever. This means we will power seven million homes with renewables, the equivalent of all households in New South Wales and Victoria. This heralds Australia's true arrival as a world leader in clean energy. The Australian Energy Market Operator, who runs our electricity grid, is backing in our approach, saying:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We are increasingly seeing renewable energy records being set which is a good thing for Australian consumers as it is key in driving prices down …</para></quote>
<para>The independent Office of Impact Analysis has analysed our Capacity Investment Scheme and said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… consumers are expected to face lower retail electricity prices on average, and a reduction in reliability risks.</para></quote>
<para>On top of this, and much to the dismay of those opposite, the Albanese government wants to see a future made in Australia, which will invest in renewables and make many thousands of jobs. We have the bill before the House right now. It will boost our capacity to build more things here, especially renewable energy components, and that's what Australians want us to do—make more things here. It's a significant investment, but it has the right outcomes. We are also easing the cost-of-living pressures by giving every household $300 off their energy bills over the next 12 months.</para>
<para>Meanwhile, the coalition have no plans to bring electricity prices down now or in the future, with their risky nuclear reactor thought bubble set to add $1,000 to every household energy bill—and it will supply less than four per cent of household energy needs, if it ever happens. We know that nuclear reactors are not even possible until 2040. What are we supposed to do in the meantime? What we know is that it's not costed, lacks detail and will drive up energy bills. Our approach stands in stark contrast, with a 25 per cent increase in renewables since we came to government only two years ago. We are shifting the dial and putting downward pressure on energy bills, and we're doing so much more.</para>
<para>We've just rolled out two amazing rounds of energy efficiency grants for small business. These are being embraced by small businesses across my electorate of Corangamite, from distilleries to retailers and from farmers to breweries. This grant is helping businesses to reduce their energy bills and embrace energy-efficient technology, as well as reduce emissions. It's all part of our broader agenda to tackle cost-of-living pressures, to drive down power prices and to make sure that regional communities are supported with costed, detailed policies that offer real cost-of-living relief. Our plan is working. I'm looking forward to energy bills coming down for people not just in my electorate but across the nation.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LANDRY</name>
    <name.id>249764</name.id>
    <electorate>Capricornia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This government's relentless march towards its renewables-only policy is hitting Capricornia hard. It is a policy that fails to understand or address the real needs of our communities. My electorate of Capricornia is quickly becoming the epicentre of government backed renewable energy projects.</para>
<para>One such project, the Lotus Creek Wind Farm, has been handed an eye-watering $924 million in funding commitments from the state Labor government. Astonishingly, $300 million of this funding has been siphoned from coal royalties—money that should have supported the industries and jobs that have sustained this region for generations. Yet, despite the enormous investment, the promised returns are meagre. Labor themselves admit that the ongoing operational phase of the wind farm will create just 10 to 15 jobs. It's hard to fathom how such a vast outlay of taxpayer money results in so little benefit for local workers and families.</para>
<para>We don't have to look far to see the effects of this approach. Just down the road from the proposed Lotus Creek Wind Farm is the Clarke Creek Wind Farm, a project that illustrates the real impact on our local communities. Over 90 per cent of the workforce of Clarke Creek are fly-in fly-out workers. Instead of creating local jobs and strengthening our communities, these workers are bussed in and out with little to no engagement with the region. The nearby town of Marlborough, for instance, sees none of the economic benefits that should come with a project of this scale. Workers don't stay in the town. They don't shop there. They don't support local businesses. They simply pass through. The government's push for renewables is leaving Capricornia behind. The jobs created are few, and the benefits for local towns and families are scarce. This government's policy is not just about energy. It's about people's livelihoods. When investment on this scale bypasses our communities, we must ask ourselves: what is the true cost?</para>
<para>Environmentalist Steven Nowakowski and Rainforest Reserves Australia have mapped a mind-boggling 17,119 wind turbine projects proposed for development right across Australia. These wind turbines and solar fields are not being built in the heart of the cities, where the energy demand is greatest. Instead, international developers are pushing their way into our regional and rural communities with the full backing of those opposite. They are clearing untouched vegetation, disrupting natural habitats and putting endangered species at serious risk, all in the name of ideological policy but without regard for the environmental and social costs borne by our communities. The hypocrisy is staggering, considering this level of industrial development would never be approved for any other type of industry. I challenge those opposite: where is the social licence for these projects? You are failing our regional and rural communities.</para>
<para>The Australian Energy Infrastructure Commissioner's own <inline font-style="italic">C</inline><inline font-style="italic">ommunity engagement review</inline> revealed that a staggering 92 per cent of people were dissatisfied with the level of community engagement on renewable projects. Additionally, 90 per cent felt that they were left in the dark, with inadequate information and unresolved concerns. Yet did Labor listen? Absolutely not. They ignored the thousands of Australians who converged on the lawns of parliament desperate to be heard. This government's disdain for regional Australia is so deep that the minister for energy couldn't even be bothered to respond. It's a clear message that the voices of the regions don't matter to this government.</para>
<para>The government's energy policies should reflect the needs of our communities, not just the ideology of the city based elite. It won't just be regional Australians paying the price for renewables-only energy policy. Already Labor is handing out billions to mop up its broken promise of price reductions. But this hasn't been enough. More than 600 everyday, hardworking Australian families have been going into financial hardship with their energy retailer every week since Labor took office. This is a shame.</para>
<para>Australians can't do another three years of the same Labor pain. The coalition has consistently championed an 'all of the above' approach to energy. We want Australia to be a country where our energy grid works 24/7, not one that is at the mercy of the weather. The truth is simple: you can't run a full-time economy on part-time power. That's why nuclear energy along with renewables and gas is absolutely critical to our energy future. The coalition's approach mirrors that of 19 of the world's 20 largest economies—an approach that balances emissions reduction, economic stability and energy security. Labor must abandon its flawed renewables-only ideology and embrace this balanced path if we are to achieve our energy and climate goals while keeping the lights on, prices down and our economy strong.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REPACHOLI</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'll start by congratulating the member for Page for actually sitting through this MPI, because usually you guys always leave. Congratulations—that's the only bit you're going to get through this.</para>
<para>Yet again, I have to stand in this place and speak on a motion moved by those opposite that doesn't make much sense to me. I'm really staggered that they continue to claim that energy prices are going up because of renewables, especially when they've proven time and time again that they can't be trusted on energy policies. They're even willing to mislead the Australian people on the truth of energy prices. When they were in government they received a report that said the energy prices were going to go up, but they hid it. And the person who hid it from all of us in the country is in chamber right now—the member for Hume. They did nothing to let the Australian people know what to expect and then they acted surprised and blamed us when the prices did eventually go up—which the member for Hume knew was going to happen because he hid it from the Australian public. He can ignore me, like he is now, but he did do this.</para>
<para>We're always going to be upfront with the Australian people, and we're helping to make these expected price rises go down. Don't just take our word for it; today, customers of Ausgrid will receive a letter saying that their energy prices are actually going down. I think I'd rather trust the figures that I'm hearing from Ausgrid over the figures preached to us by those over there, who are driven by their stubborn opposition to the cheapest form of energy.</para>
<para>Let me tell you a fact that those opposite used to ignore: renewables are effective in getting energy into the grid. In fact, we're getting so much energy into the grid that we're having to build more powerlines to increase the capacity of the grid. In my electorate of the Hunter, we have always produced high amounts of energy, and this government is making sure that energy produced in the Hunter is able to be used in other areas that don't get to generate as much. Those opposite always bang on about how they want reliable power, but they don't want us to build the infrastructure that is needed to deliver it.</para>
<para>The motion also states that our policy is only about renewables. What a rubbish statement this is by the member for Page! You'd think that the member for Page would do his research before moving this motion but, clearly, he hasn't. If he had thought to look at our energy policy before moving this motion, he'd see our policy is far from being only about renewable energy. Instead of doing his research, he has been blinded by his party's ideological ignorance. He has come in here and moved this motion and made himself look foolish. Yes, there are some elements of our policy that do include renewable energy. Is the member for Page going to stay and listen to the end of this or not? Because I'd like him to. We would be foolish not to make the most of the cheapest form of energy available—I thank the member for Page for staying! We based our decision on facts, and the facts show that renewables need to be a big part of meeting our energy needs in the future. We have announced the $1 billion Solar Sunshot program, which will create thousands of jobs, many of these being in my electorate. Our policy will also help to see two gigawatts of power put in the grid through offshore wind, which is in the electorate of my good friend the member for Newcastle. This will create huge job opportunities for people in my electorate and also people all around New South Wales.</para>
<para>To say that our policy is solely about renewables is untrue. We have the gas-fired power station in the electorate of my good friend and neighbour the member for Paterson, and we have pumped hydro projects popping up everywhere. In my electorate alone, in the Hunter, we have six pumped hydro projects under development. Neither of these sources of energy fits into the solely-renewables narrative that those opposite are trying desperately to promote, but both are an important part of energy policy and play a vital role in providing baseload firming power to the grid.</para>
<para>Another non-renewable part of our energy policy that those opposite are conveniently choosing to ignore is the importance of hydrogen and the role it will play into the future. In my electorate is a hydrogen hub, and AGL are pushing ahead with their plans to develop the technology in Muswellbrook. In addition, Origin is also going into hydrogen at the Port of Newcastle in the member for Newcastle's electorate. But you won't hear those opposite talk about these parts of the policy, which includes gas, pumped hydro and hydrogen. I guess that if something doesn't fit into the story then they just won't tell it. It's easier for them to ignore it. But ignoring the facts does nothing to provide cheap and reliable energy. Those opposite have misled the Australian people on energy prices, and they are misleading them on energy policy as well. They can't be trusted on energy. We've seen that over the years, and we'll continue to watch what we do.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOYCE</name>
    <name.id>299498</name.id>
    <electorate>Flynn</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I would just like to remind the member for Hunter that renewable energy is not reliable. When the sun goes down, solar panels don't work. When the wind doesn't blow, wind turbines don't work. It is quite ridiculous for him to suggest that renewable energy is reliable. This is what the whole problem of energy is all about—reliability.</para>
<para>I'm happy to rise and support this matter of public importance and note that the government's renewables-only energy policy, with industrial wind turbines and solar factories and thousands of kilometres of new transmission lines, is ripping up agricultural land and pristine wilderness and driving up the cost of living in regional and rural Australia. I would like to acknowledge the fact that the opposition speakers in today's MPI represent the electorates which are most affected here in Australia. They are seeing firsthand how farmers are being impacted by Labor's arrogant policy to steamroll local communities in pushing forward with the installation of some 28,000 kilometres of transmission lines, along with solar, wind and battery projects. There are people everywhere in my electorate who are feeling the brunt of Labor's reckless renewable energy rollout. We've identified over 60 wind, solar and battery, and transmission line projects in Central Queensland alone.</para>
<para>Very recently, we gathered a whole lot of data on wind turbines in particular. Our data shows that there are over 18,000 wind turbines proposed up and down the coast of Australia, and this does not take into account any offshore wind turbines. Quite often, those opposite will comment on how cheap this is going to be—that it is not going to be expensive. Let's just examine some of the sunk capital costs that are involved in these 18,000 wind turbines. My colleague the member for Capricornia spoke of a wind turbine project in Central Queensland, Lotus Creek, that has been recently acquired by the Queensland government's CS Energy. It is a project of 46 turbines, which is costing $1.3 billion. If you do the maths on that, it comes out at approximately $28 million per turbine. If you use those figures and project that onto the research that we've done on all of these wind turbines that are proposed, you come to a figure of something like $400 billion. That is just extraordinary. The simple fact of the matter is that that doesn't take into account transmission lines, distribution lines, batteries and all of the things associated with reaching 82 per cent renewable energy by 2030. To suggest that it is not expensive is just ridiculous.</para>
<para>The other problem is that Labor will require 34 times the current amount of utility-scale variable renewable energy in the National Electricity Market to meet its hydrogen expectations. Gladstone has also been nominated as a hydrogen hub. As recently as last year, the Gladstone Ports Corporation—again, a Queensland government GOC—gave a presentation where they proposed a four-million-tonne hydrogen precinct which would require 110 gigawatts of renewable energy. I wonder whether those opposite even understand what 110 gigawatts of renewable energy means. That is approximately double the entire generating capacity of the Australian grid right now. It's just outrageous to suggest that. The presentation went on to say that this will require 10,000 wind turbines to be built and 2½ square kilometres of solar panels. Where are you going to put these projects in Central Queensland?</para>
<para>It is just outrageous to suggest that the Australian economy can rely on renewables only. That is why the coalition is proposing nuclear, which, at the very least, will supply reliable power into the future.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BYRNES</name>
    <name.id>299145</name.id>
    <electorate>Cunningham</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Here we go again. Over the past hour we've seen the chalice of cooker Kool Aid be passed throughout the opposition benches, each one taking a nice big sip of climate denial and then spouting harmful misinformation and driving deliberate division in our regional communities. It is the decade of energy policy chaos from those opposite that has Australians paying the price for their inaction. Their 22 failed energy policies are costing regional Australians because we now have an energy sector that is vulnerable to international price spikes and ageing coal-fired power stations, with 24 of 28 announcing their closure under their watch.</para>
<para>But don't worry, the Albanese Labor government is fixing the mess left behind by the former government's decade of denial, delay and dysfunction. Our reliable renewables plan is the only plan supported by experts to deliver the clean, cheap, reliable and resilient energy system that Australians deserve. We are maximising cheap, clean energy, with a plan to get our national energy grid to 82 per cent renewables by 2030. We've already delivered a 25 per cent increase in the national energy grid in just two years and we have ticked off enough renewable project to power more than three million homes.</para>
<para>We're investing in battery storage and transmission to ensure reliable power can be accessed everywhere. We're modernising our national electricity grid and delivering over 400 new community batteries for increased reliability across the country, including in my electorate in the suburb of Warrawong and in the member for Whitlam's electorate in Dapto. We're ensuring the benefits of reliable renewables are shared with households and businesses.</para>
<para>We're also creating thousands of jobs with the Future Made in Australia policy. It is estimated that over 60,000 people could be directly employed in new energy infrastructure by 2050. These are good, well-paid, secure jobs of the future for our kids and for our regions. Our renewable energy transformation will require five billion tonnes of steel alone between now and 2050, which will support Illawarra workers at the Port Kembla steelworks.</para>
<para>The usual diatribe from those opposite would have you believe that renewable energy is this big, bad, scary creature. And no, I'm not talking about the opposition's frontbench. Instead of dividing the community, we are bringing them along with us and we saw 330,000 rooftop solar installations last year alone. That is because Australians know that the cheapest and most reliable forms of energy are renewables.</para>
<para>If you listen to those opposite you might also think that renewables are bad for our farms and our oceans but—you guessed it—climate change is the biggest threat to Australia's agricultural sector. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, climate change has slowed the growth of agricultural productivity globally over the last 50 years with further warming projected to increase food insecurity and supply instability.</para>
<para>I know that those opposite have had a hard time believing our national and international science institutions. Maybe they'll listen to Professor Gregory Andrews, Australia's first Threatened Species Commissioner and a Dharawal man, who said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The science shows Australia's whales do face serious threats—but not from wind farms. By reducing our reliance on fossil fuels, wind farms help protect ocean habitats from the impacts of rising temperatures and ocean acidification.</para></quote>
<para>The only thing stronger than Australia's abundance of sunshine and natural resources is the opposition's ability to backflip on their policy positions. The member for New England, who has become the poster child for the antirenewables movement, is about as flexible as they come. Delivering an address to the Clean Energy Council Australian Clean Energy Summit in 2017, he said: 'What can I say about renewable energy? It's the great effect it is having on my electorate. You see, at Glen Innes, in excess of $1 billion going to be invested in renewable energy.' A backflip of that degree would have earned him gold at the Olympics.</para>
<para>But that's not all. Not only do they want to dispel the cheapest form of energy; those opposite also want to serve up nuclear, the most expensive form of energy there is, and make regional Australians pay for it. Experts agree that Dutton's nuclear plan is too expensive, too slow to build and too risky. The Albanese Labor government's reliable renewables plan is the only plan supported by experts to deliver the clean, cheap, reliable and resilient energy systems that Australia deserves.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The discussion has now concluded.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PARLIAMENTARY REPRESENTATION</title>
        <page.no>75</page.no>
        <type>PARLIAMENTARY REPRESENTATION</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Valedictory</title>
          <page.no>75</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BURNEY</name>
    <name.id>8GH</name.id>
    <electorate>Barton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>on indulgence—I acknowledge the Ngunnawal and Ngambri peoples. Thank you for allowing us to be on your country.</para>
<para>As I stand here today, I am deeply reflective and immensely grateful for the journey I have shared with you all in this parliament. When I first entered this House, I knew I was walking a path that had never before been walked by someone like me, the first Indigenous woman elected to the House of Representatives—a path paved with hope, with responsibility and with a deep commitment to representing not just my own community of Barton but all Australians, including, of course, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. I am humbled by the trust and the ownership of me shown by First Nations Australians, many of whom are still paying a heavy price for dispossession and exclusion from our nation's foundation and, too often, exclusion from the institutions which exist to serve us all.</para>
<para>All up, I have been a member of parliament for 21 years. It has been the most profound honour to serve and to work towards a more just and inclusive Australia. My commitment has been to serve with fairness, compassion and integrity. I have never seen public service as a way to be liked or popular. Anyone who does will get a rude shock. But I hope to leave having earned respect for the way I have worked and the work that I have done.</para>
<para>When I was growing up as a freshwater girl in the Riverina, the daughter of an Aboriginal man and a white woman, raised by my great aunt Nina and her brother Billy, we didn't have much—just a small wooden house with no carpet or paint inside, no running water, and an outhouse—up in the back corner of the yard, thankfully. They were two very old people who sacrificed so much to raise me and instilled in me the values of compassion, integrity, resilience, truth and love. I never dreamt I could grow up to be a member of parliament, let alone a minister in the federal government. Nina and Billy, I hope I made you proud.</para>
<para>Being elected to this place was the greatest honour of my life, from fighting against the unfair and illegal robodebt scheme during my time as shadow minister for human services to securing landmark commitments to remote housing, justice reinvestment and remote jobs; delivering justice to the families affected by the collapse of Youpla; and doubling the number of Indigenous rangers. Most importantly, I have been part of a government that is building new dialysis units in remote Australia; rolling out hundreds of new Indigenous health workers; rolling out amazing new infrastructure, delivering a pipeline of improvements to remote drinking water supplies as well as better digital connectivity; revitalising First Nations languages; and growing opportunities for education, and now, with the leadership of the Prime Minister, our economic development. But there is so much more. We've also committed to establishing a national children's commissioner for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young people and children.</para>
<para>These steps forward are a team effort, with ministers stepping up, ministers taking responsibility for delivering for Indigenous people in their portfolio and the whole Labor cabinet doing its bit. This is a profound and incredibly important improvement. When I arrived in this place in 2016, it felt like issues affecting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people had been pushed into a silo to be dealt with only by the Indigenous affairs minister, who, quite frankly, will never have their hands on the levers of employment, health, education and other portfolios where the big changes will be made in closing the gap. I've seen the difference a proactive Labor government can make on the ground in communities. I am so proud of our achievements over the last eight years in this place.</para>
<para>I am proud too of my 13 years in the New South Wales parliament, of making important reforms to child protection, delivering on the findings of the Wood Special Commission of Inquiry into Child Protection Services in NSW and introducing the Aboriginal child placement principle. There are few areas in public policy more complex, more fraught and more difficult than child protection. I only had to read the files; I didn't live the horror. Despite the many challenges that remain, I know those changes and the work of people on the front line have saved families and saved lives. When I had the responsibility for the prevention of family violence, New South Wales led the way with the Staying Home Leaving Violence program, which flipped responsibility for family violence and supported women and children to stay in their homes. It was a just approach which is now the norm across the country.</para>
<para>Before I came into the federal parliament, I said I would miss the close connections state governments have with people's lives, like when we fitted chocks into the windows of flats, which stopped them opening more than a few inches and prevented children falling out. There had been a spate of children falling out of windows. I was also pleased to lay the groundwork for stronger laws to protect tenants, and, of course, I had the honour of being elected the deputy leader of the New South Wales Labor Party.</para>
<para>Before entering state parliament, I was first a teacher and then I worked in Aboriginal education, heading up the Aboriginal Education Consultative Group and eventually becoming the director-general of the Department of Aboriginal Affairs, where it was an honour to be part of organising the historic bridge walk in the year 2000, when over 250,000 Australians marched in solidarity with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. My time at the Department of Aboriginal Affairs was the first time I truly had to grapple with the policy challenges and cross-portfolio disparity that became known as Closing the Gap. But, before Closing the Gap, there was Gayle, who worked on reception at DAA. One fell Friday afternoon, I heard Gail sum up the human cost of the gap when she answered a call about special benefits allegedly going to Aboriginal people. 'I'll tell you what we get,' said Gayle. 'We get diabetes. We get a shorter life expectancy. We get to see our kids drop out of school and go to jail. We get turned away from jobs. We get to go to too many funerals. That's what we get.' That caller never rang back.</para>
<para>In my first speech to the New South Wales parliament, I spoke about the importance of walking in someone else's shoes. It is a lesson I took from Harper Lee's <inline font-style="italic">T</inline><inline font-style="italic">o Kill a Mockingbird</inline>. So walk in the shoes of the next generation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians because more than half of our population is under the age of 25. Despite significant improvements in many areas, First Nations young people still don't start on a level playing field. Our people are more likely to have experienced homelessness than to hold an undergraduate degree, and, as our Prime Minister has said, in 2020, the number of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people locked up in a prison cell was four times higher than the number who celebrated graduating uni that year. Walk in those shoes.</para>
<para>I also want to share some thoughts on last year's Voice referendum. The referendum did not achieve the outcomes many of us—all of us here—wanted. But I believe it can and will be a catalyst for progress and positive change in our nation and that, in the years to come, it will be looked on more kindly by history because constitutional recognition has been championed for decades by many of you here. The government and parliament finally had the courage to put the question to the people because of the role it played in inspiring a new generation of young Indigenous leaders to emerge—also some of you here—and to push the change for a better future. It showed that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in remote communities overwhelmingly wanted their voice to be heard, and 6.3 million Australians said yes. It highlighted how far we've come and how far we still must go to be a truly reconciled country. I acknowledge the many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and fellow travellers who opened their hearts and minds and put their shoulders to the wheel, including people from across the parliament who I'm looking at now. Thank you all, and, particularly, thank you, Julian, for your brave stand.</para>
<para>Friends, progress doesn't always move in a straight line. The road is rocky. There are obstacles in the path. We have our stumbles and our setbacks, but our overall direction is towards progress, and, with each passing generation, we bend the moral arc of the universe closer to justice. I think Australia sometimes struggles with its identity because we never came to terms with our own story, never embraced the breadth and depth of it, and certainly not its truth.</para>
<para>The generosity we pride ourselves on is rarely extended to the people in this nation who have occupied these lands for countless generations. Why? Part of the answer is that we don't have a shared narrative. If you consider our nation's story like the strata of a rock, there is an extraordinary foundation of First Nations people, the layer of European settlers—and, of course, many convicts amongst those numbers—and then there is layer upon layer of people who settled in Australia because of conflict and the search for a better life. Many of you are children of those people. All of us live in that cross-section. All of it and all of us—what a story. You take the whole, not just the bits that suit you.</para>
<para>I believe that community-led truth-telling can help with that. There is nothing to fear or lose from the truth. I am heartened by the Prime Minister's ongoing commitment to addressing the challenges facing First Peoples, particularly on Closing the Gap. I'm heartened to see my friend Senator Malarndirri McCarthy become the new minister and hit the ground running. The baton has been passed on.</para>
<para>I also make these points about Indigenous affairs. Having a roof over your head and a job is vitally important. That's why we are investing $4 billion in remote housing in the Northern Territory and overhauling the failed CDP program, replacing it with real jobs and real wages in remote communities. Also important is having pride in our culture, identity and language; so too is a sense of belonging, and so too is knowing the true history of our country. We don't have to choose between so-called practical and symbolic reconciliation. It's a false choice; it's a phony argument. The notion that somehow governments and Indigenous communities must choose between so-called practical and symbolic reconciliation is an old and tired debate that belongs in the 1990s, not the 2020s. It is now up to everyone here—and I know you will; I really do—and in the other place to ensure that reconciliation and Closing the Gap are policy areas of bipartisan cooperation, of common ground, not division.</para>
<para>In 2000, following the Walk for Reconciliation across the Sydney Harbour Bridge and the dozens of events that I know many of you were involved in across the country, it was a historic moment on the journey to the apology some years later. Michelle Grattan asked me for my thoughts on reconciliation. I said: 'Healing in Australia is a profound, long-term, incremental thing. It's about people. It's a tough road, but I think we will get there.' Everyone: 24 years later, I still believe that. Let us remember that this is about people. Let us remember what those increments are: a secure home for a family, a new job, clean water for a community and a place at uni—life-changing steps forward.</para>
<para>I have a few people to thank. To the Prime Minister: you have always been my friend and mentor, always by my side and on my side. To my Labor colleagues: thank you for your unwavering support. Politics has not been a lonely place for me because of you. You have been a source of strength when I have needed it most. To leaders under which I have had the honour of serving—prior to the Prime Minister, of course—Bill Shorten, Bob Carr, Morris Iemma, Nathan Rees and Kristina Keneally, I thank you all. I also thank my dear friends that are here. You have kept me standing when I couldn't stand on my own. You mean the world to me. Thank you for travelling all the distances that you have. I thank the First Nations members of the caucus, including Patrick Dodson. I thank Gordon, Marion, Malarndirri and Joanna for their camaraderie and for being there.</para>
<para>To my family, Willurai and her partner Elle, you will be seeing a lot more of me over the next few months. Thank you for being the remarkable people that you are. You inspire me. To those at the NIAA who work in the parliament, including the media, and the Public Service more generally: the Public Service is a noble profession, and you deserve far more recognition for what you do. And to all my staff in the electorate and the ministerial office: over the years, thank you; you are the true stars. To Tim Watts and Maria Pasten, in particular: I recognise your service and your leadership. What we have been able to achieve has been multiplied through your efforts. To those watching online: thank you. To the branch members and volunteers in New South Wales Labor: it is you who carry our movement. You are the engine of progress and fairness in this country. To you, Mr Speaker—we started on the same day; look where we are now—I recognise and thank everyone in this parliament. I do that through you.</para>
<para>Finally, to the amazing constituents of Barton and Canterbury: thank you for giving me the opportunity of a lifetime. Working in this house of democracy is a great honour—a place of vigorous debate, a place where the contest of ideas plays out. But it should not be a place for punching down. It should not be a place where minority groups are demonised. Reasonable people can disagree, and our democracy will be better if we can disagree agreeably.</para>
<para>As I prepare to move on to the next chapter of my life, I do so with a heart filled with hope. Both my first speech in the New South Wales parliament and my first speech in this place contained the same two promises: first, that I will always work hard, and, second, that I will always do my best. I think I've kept those commitments.</para>
<para>My life has been the both harsh and kind. I have known loss I would never wish on anyone, but I have never, ever lost hope. While there are those who believe that political success depends on discovering your humanity or locking it away, I say to all of you who follow me and to my friends and colleagues who carry on the fight: never lose your faith in others. Never lose your trust in the people who brought you here.</para>
<para>Twenty-one years: 10 years in government, 11 years on the crossbenches—not the crossbenches; in opposition. That might have been better! And let me tell you: you can do more in one day in government than you can in a whole term in opposition, so don't waste the days. Big change is still possible in this country. Do not waste a day.</para>
<para>As I finish my speech today, I take you back eight years. Lynette Riley sang me into this House. Today, as I close this chapter on my life, her daughter Garra will sing me out. I will then make a statement in Wiradjuri, so please remain in your seats, as they say on the plane. Thank you, Garra.</para>
<para> <inline font-style="italic">Ms Riley-Mundine then sang in Wiradjuri language</inline> <inline font-style="italic">—</inline></para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BURNEY</name>
    <name.id>8GH</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you, Garra.</para>
<para>In conclusion, I say in Wiradjuri these words: I am proud to be Wiradjuri. This has been a great journey. Thank you; it's been an honour. We will make progress when we all work together. We have a strong and bright future.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">Ms Burney then spoke in Wiradjuri language—</inline></para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BURNEY</name>
    <name.id>8GH</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>See youse all later!</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>on indulgence—What a moment in this parliament, my friend. As someone who has been my federal local member and my state local member as the member for Barton for Canterbury, Linda Burney is also my very, very dear friend. She leaves parliament as she entered it; with a message of hope, with a positivity that I wish that we could all embrace in the context in which Linda Burney does. She is someone whose origins were tougher than probably anyone who has ever entered this place, and who has known loss and difficulty and who has had every reason to lose faith in humanity but has never lost a bit of it. She has always been so positive. As Linda Burney reflected on the referendum, she had faith in her fellow Australians, and that's a good thing. I would much rather be on the side of hope than on the side of fear, and Linda Burney has always been on the side of hope. She has engaged with grace, with kindness and, importantly, with remarkable courage. That's why she leaves this place with the admiration of anyone who has dealt with her and with the respect of everyone.</para>
<para>The member for Barton has always given her heart and soul to the causes that she champions and the people for whom she advocates. We see that in her words today and, importantly, we also see that in her deeds over two decades in which she has been determined to make a difference, whether it be with her local constituents in Canterbury, firstly, and then in Barton, whether it be in her engagement with people in the Labor Party, or whether it be with people across the chamber. I've never heard Linda Burney make a harsh statement about any individual in this place or anywhere else, in spite of what she has been subjected to in her life from time to time—including, unfortunately, in her political engagement. She has risen above it and has truly been able to take in the philosophy of 'when they go low, I go high'. Linda Burney has done that her whole life, and today, once again, she has done that.</para>
<para>She has made history as the first Indigenous woman to be elected to the New South Wales Parliament, as the first Indigenous woman to be elected to the House of Representatives, as the first Indigenous woman to serve as a cabinet minister, and as the first Indigenous woman to serve as the minister for Indigenous Australians. She has made a difference: by abolishing the CDP and replacing it with a plan for real jobs and real wages in remote communities; by expanding—doubling—the number of Indigenous rangers; and in justice reinvestment and remote training. With the tools of community empowerment and self-determination, we see the difference that she has made in practical areas like in giving people access to dialysis, the difference that she is making to turn around some of the terrible gap—the chasm—that still exists between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australia. Through our ERC processes, which are not always easy, Linda managed a four-billion dollar commitment to remote housing, which is an extraordinary achievement, as was creating the National Commissioner for Torres Strait Islander Children and Young People.</para>
<para>For Linda, so much of this work and so much of politics has been personal. That means disappointment can run deep and have an emotional impact. It means setbacks do hit home and they can bring tears. Linda's tears have mostly been of joy as well as occasionally of sadness.</para>
<para>Linda has such passion, such empathy, such true connection with people who engage with her. It's one of the reasons why we see the galleries packed here today with lifelong friends who will remain her lifelong friends, as will many people across this great chamber of parliament.</para>
<para>Linda will take her considerable presence from here after the election but we'll get to hold onto her wisdom and the power of her example. For that we are grateful as a parliament. I am grateful as leader of the Australian Labor Party. On a personal level, I am grateful for someone who I have a deep affection and love for.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
    <electorate>Riverina</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Member for Barton, I have nothing but yindyamarra for you. For those of you who don't know what yindyamarra means, in Wiradjuri it means 'respect'. For the Hansard translators, there was a beautiful song we were treated to. If they want to get a translation of that they need to go no further than Stan Grant Senior's book on the Wiradjuri language.</para>
<para>Both Stan Grant Senior and Linda Burney come from the Riverina and are proud of the Riverina. I know that Linda is a proud Whitton girl and she spent her primary years at that little village's primary school. She's gone on to great things. We thank you for that, Linda. We respect you for that.</para>
<para>Your work is not finished and we know that you are going to be a powerful voice not just for Indigenous people and not just for Torres Strait Islanders but for all Australians into the future. Thank you for what you have done in your public life. We respect that. We honour you as a Riverina girl who has gone on to great things, and not just here in Australia. The respect that you have is right around the world. You have shown what we can and should do for Indigenous peoples all over the world. So I say to you, on behalf of Riverina people, thank you.</para>
<para>To Senator McCarthy, good luck in your ministerial role. You have a lot of work to do, we know that, and to bridge the divide is so important. It's one of the most important things that we have as a parliament and as a people.</para>
<para>Again, to you, member for Barton, thank you for all that you've done and for all that you will do in the future.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PRIVILEGE</title>
        <page.no>79</page.no>
        <type>PRIVILEGE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Prime Minister</title>
          <page.no>79</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On Monday the Manager of Opposition Business raised as a matter of privilege whether the Prime Minister had deliberately misled the House such as would constitute a contempt of the House. The claim arises from the Prime Minister's response to a question from the Leader of the Opposition during question time last Thursday, 15 August, in which the Prime Minister referred to statements of the ASIO director-general. Deliberately misleading the House is one of the matters that can be found to be a contempt. A claim of deliberately misleading is a very serious one, and, rightly, there should be prima facie evidence that the House has been misled and that the misleading has been deliberate. In addition, to amount to a contempt, the action would need to amount to, or be intended or likely to amount to, an improper interference with the free exercise by the House of its functions. Although different in its particulars, this complaint has elements in common with other claims that have been made that a member has deliberately misled the House.</para>
<para>I have examined the <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline> of the relevant period of last Thursday's question time. The essence of the relevant exchange at that time was that the Leader of the Opposition said the Prime Minister had misquoted the ASIO director-general and that the Prime Minister said he read out three different quotes of the director-general. The Speaker's role in this matter is to determine whether priority over other business should be given to a motion for referral of a matter to the Committee of Privileges and Members' Interests. In order to grant precedence in such a matter, the Speaker would need to see evidence that a member misled the House and that they did so intentionally. On the evidence available to me, it's not clear that a prima facie case has been made out such as would cause me to give precedence to a motion to refer the matter to the committee.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>COMMITTEES</title>
        <page.no>79</page.no>
        <type>COMMITTEES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Privileges and Members' Interests Committee</title>
          <page.no>79</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Reference</title>
            <page.no>79</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FLETCHER</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
    <electorate>Bradfield</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Manager of Opposition Business from moving the following motion forthwith—That the following matter be referred to the Committee of Privileges and Members' Interests:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Whether in misquoting the Director-General of ASIO while answering a question without notice from the Leader of the Opposition on 15 August 2024, the Prime Minister had deliberately misled the House, such as would constitute a contempt of the House.</para></quote>
<para>Mr Speaker, I am disappointed and, I must say, somewhat surprised at the decision that you have just announced, and it leaves me with no alternative but to take the step I now take. I note that just last week when a Labor member of parliament raised an issue of privilege you did agree to refer it to the Committee of Privileges and Members' Interests. It is very important that there be scrupulous impartiality in the way that these matters are dealt with, but, in view of the decision you have taken, there is no alternative but for me to move this suspension.</para>
<para>I note, for the information of the House, that there is a precedent for the House agreeing to refer a matter to the Privileges Committee in circumstances where the Speaker has declined to grant precedence. On 21 May 2012 this House agreed to refer the case of the then member for Dobell to the Committee of Privileges and Members' Interests, over his deliberate misleading of the House.</para>
<para>Therefore, the step that I am now taking puts the House in the position to take a decision, should it choose, to refer this matter to the Committee of Privileges and Members' Interests. In view of the gravity of what occurred on 15 August in question time, I submit that it is entirely appropriate that the House should make that decision, and it's certainly appropriate that standing orders should be suspended so that the House can consider this matter and so that a motion to refer could be put and voted on, because, I say to this House, this issue is a very important one for the operation of this House and for the question of whether the Australian people can trust this Prime Minister and take what he says at face value. It's deeply unfortunate that it's necessary to move this suspension. It's deeply unfortunate that it was necessary to raise this as a matter of privilege. But it should surely be the case that the Australian people can expect that, when the Prime Minister says something in this chamber, they can have confidence that it is both truthful and accurate.</para>
<para>Of course, mistakes do occur on the fly in the heated and fast-moving environment in which we operate. But, where a mistake has been made, it has been the long-accepted practice of this House that a minister, including a prime minister, who has made a statement which in all the circumstances is misleading will come into this House at the earliest possible opportunity to correct the record. Since the opposition has raised this matter, the Prime Minister, by contrast, has taken every possible opportunity to avoid doing what he would rightly be expected to do.</para>
<para>Let me remind the House of what happened. The Prime Minister, in the course of question time on 15 August 2024, stated that the director-general of ASIO had said in an interview on <inline font-style="italic">I</inline><inline font-style="italic">nsiders</inline> on 11 August 2024:</para>
<quote><para class="block">If they've been issued a visa, they've gone through the process … they're referred to my organisation and ASIO does its thing.</para></quote>
<para>But, in fact, what Mr Burgess actually said was:</para>
<quote><para class="block">If they've been issued a visa they've gone through the process. Part of the process is where criteria are hit they're referred to my organisation and ASIO does its thing.</para></quote>
<para>The Prime Minister left out the crucial words from what the director-general of ASIO actually said. The director-general of ASIO actually used the words 'where criteria are hit'. The Prime Minister deliberately omitted the words so that it would appear that what Mr Burgess was saying was that everyone who gets a visa has had a security assessment by ASIO, but that is not true. It is a matter of public record that not everyone who has received a visa to travel from the Gaza war zone to Australia has had a security assessment by ASIO. The Prime Minister's deliberate misquoting gave a false impression to anyone listening to him in the House or on the official broadcast of proceedings.</para>
<para>Since the Prime Minister made the statement containing this misleading quote, this inaccurate quote, this quote that omitted the critical words and, as a result, what he said to the House was a fundamental mischaracterisation of what Mr Burgess had in fact said and was a characterisation which gave the opposite impression of what Mr Burgess had actually said, the opposition have repeatedly called on the Prime Minister to do two simple things: to correct the record and to provide an explanation as to the government's handling of the security assessment process that is applied when individuals have sought visas to come to Australia from the Gaza war zone. We have moved motions to deal with this matter and, in each case, the government has simply adjourned the debate before allowing it to come to a vote. On each occasion the Prime Minister has declined to appear in this chamber and explain to this chamber what happened and to do as he ought to do. As is the convention in this place when you've said something that is wrong, inaccurate or incorrect, you come in and correct the record. Any prime minister of integrity or of good character would do that. On this side of the House we recognise that errors get made. We recognise things that get said in the heat of the moment. But the fact that this Prime Minister has consistently over a number of sitting days refused to come into this place and correct the record is powerful evidence that this was intentional from the outset. This was a deliberate misleading of the House.</para>
<para>That is why this matter urgently needs to be referred to the Committee of Privileges and Members' Interests. The Prime Minister on Monday tabled a transcript as presumably an attempt to get through this issue without having to do what is required in the circumstances, without having to admit that in fact he misled the House. He tabled a transcript of Mr Burgess on <inline font-style="italic">Insiders</inline> and that transcript does contain the phrase which he deliberately omitted when he spoke in this place—'part of that visa process is where criteria are hit'. That is included in the transcript that the Prime Minister tabled on Monday, and yet the quote that he used on the previous Thursday deliberately omitted those words with the consequence that the opposite impression was given to those listening in this chamber or on the broadcast as to whether it is the automatic process that whenever an application is made there is a security assessment by ASIO. In fact, it is clear from the full and accurate quote that that is not what happens, but we know that it suits the Prime Minister's political interests to give the impression that that is what happens. That is why he engaged in this deliberate misquoting.</para>
<para>The committee of privileges has significant powers. It can call for documents from individuals connected to the matter. It is, we submit, an entirely appropriate circumstance in which those powers should be used. I conclude by reading a quote:</para>
<quote><para class="block">If successful I am determined to restore a greater sense of responsibility to the Office of Prime Minister.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">A deeper respect for the Australian people and for the integrity of our democracy.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Real accountability—and delivery.</para></quote>
<para>That soaring rhetoric came from the now Prime Minister when he delivered remarks on 4 March 2022 at the Lowy Institute. We are asking that the Prime Minister live up to the accepted standards of this place and to his own soaring rhetoric. That is why this matter is urgent.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00AMT</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is there a seconder for the motion?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HOGAN</name>
    <name.id>218019</name.id>
    <electorate>Page</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I do second the motion and reiterate the importance of this motion and what the Manager of Opposition Business has said about what is really now a debacle. For Hansard and for people listening, I'm going to go through the quote that was said by the ASIO chief, Mr Burgess, and again say what the Prime Minister said when, we believe, he misled this House. The direct quote on 11 August on <inline font-style="italic">Insiders</inline> was:</para>
<quote><para class="block">If they've been issued a visa, they've gone through the process. Part of that visa process is, where criteria are hit—</para></quote>
<para>I've got that circled; you'll know the importance of that in a moment—</para>
<quote><para class="block">they're referred to my organisation and ASIO does its thing.</para></quote>
<para>The Prime Minister said Mr Burgess said in his interview:</para>
<quote><para class="block">If they've been issued a visa, they've gone through the process … they're referred to my organisation and ASIO does its thing.</para></quote>
<para>You could give him some credit if the bit about where it says where the criteria was hit was at the start or at the end. You could say, 'Well, okay; he didn't misquote.' But he's taken a quote, kept the start of the quote and the end of the quote and left out nine words that completely change the essence of what Mr Burgess said. This is why this is such an important issue and why the Manager of Opposition Business has moved this.</para>
<para>Let's take the Prime Minister, be generous and say that he was unaware of that, that it was an honest mistake. It was very easily resolved, and we would have moved on a long time ago and not be doing this motion now. If he'd come in and said, 'I'll correct the record. This was the record. I said this. This was the full quote,' and read out in parliament what had actually occurred that was different from what he said, we all would have moved on. But again, this Prime Minister can't do that. He can't come in and say, 'Yes, I made'—he could say it was an honest mistake. We'd accept that if that's what he believed it was. But he can't even say that, and that's why this is so important.</para>
<para>Obviously, he should have corrected the record and come to explain that to the chamber as soon as that was called out. We'd also obviously want an explanation on the government's handling of security arrangements for visas for individuals from the Gaza war. In fact, every time we've done something in the chamber—we've moved motions, we're doing this now and there are three or four other things that have happened in this chamber—the Prime Minister has never come in to defend himself on this. He's never come in and said, 'Well, I see what you're saying,' and tried to correct that.'</para>
<para>I'm certainly aware of the seriousness of this, but we believe that only the powerful Committee of Privileges and Members' Interests has the power to truly hold the Prime Minister accountable for this. I think it's unfortunate that I feel this way and feel the need to say this, but this is a bit of a pattern with the Prime Minister. He says Makarrata to one crowd means this, to another crowd he says that. He says one thing to the Muslim community and another thing to the Jewish community. Now we've got him taking a quote from Mr Burgess from ASIO and. Because of where it is in the quote, it looks really deliberate, like he was deliberately misquoting him to change the essence of what he actually said.</para>
<para>Now, you might say, 'Well, why are you making a big deal of this? So what?' but let's look at what the thing behind this is. What's behind this? We all saw the horrific things that happened on October 7. The people that did those horrific acts—not only were they horrific; they actually felt it was okay to film them. They actually filmed themselves doing barbaric acts and thought it was okay to film themselves and celebrate those horrible things. And there are obviously people within Gaza who don't support that and don't like that, and Hamas, the terrorist organisation, hides behind them in tunnels and in schools and hospitals. We don't want those people coming here. The Prime Minister should correct the record. He should say that he misquoted the security checks that were happening.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
    <electorate>Watson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I won't delay the House for long. You can tell from the speakers we just heard when their heart is in an issue, and you know when they think, 'Okay, we have to move this.' Can I just say you don't have to move a motion like this. For the entire time we were in opposition, when we made privileges references, if they were given precedence by the Speaker—who obviously was never a Speaker from our party during our time in opposition—we accepted the call of the Speaker. If they weren't given precedence, we viewed that as unfortunate, but we'd had our go. If they were given precedence, then you would have immediately moved the resolution. That was the respect that we had for the office of Speaker when we were in opposition.</para>
<para>I might add that at least they are consistent in opposition with how they were in government! There was an occasion when Speaker Smith gave precedence to a reference—from memory—about Christian Porter, notwithstanding that he'd given precedence, and the motion was moved. The government of the day, including the members who just spoke, voted against their own Speaker and the whole process in terms—</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>of precedence being given. These issues and the process here are something that have existed for a long time. Effectively, this group that ran the last government and is now running the current opposition, no matter what they say about process and precedent, actually have no respect for it at all. That's exactly what we're seeing now. I've had lots of arguments with lots of Speakers over the years, but I've never seen a situation where a reference to privileges has been inappropriately dealt with by any Speaker. They always rely heavily on the professional advice available from the clerks. It's still their decision; I respect that. But it has always been done in the completely appropriate fashion. I've probably made more privileges references and tried my hand at this more than most people in the place. Some of them got over the line, and some didn't. But what I haven't done is then said, 'Well, if the umpire didn't call my way, then I'm going to kick up a bit of a stink about it.' That's all this resolution is.</para>
<para>With that in mind, I would also simply add this on the substance of what they're wanting to take issue with. All the words quoted were accurate, and they're saying the issue was that an abridged quote was used. Every single day in question time, these same people take points of order on relevance, and they can't even fully quote their own questions. They use an abridged quotation roughly two or three times every single day in question time. That's what they do, and they claim that, therefore, it can't be relevant, even though it might be relevant to something else that we're doing. Maybe that's why their hearts are not in this motion.</para>
<para>Mr Fletcher interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Well, it's hard to get worked up over wet lettuce!</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I accept there are many different forms of parliamentary tactics, but the Manager of Opposition Business is a master at the phrase 'killing someone with boredom'. So, yes—we take that hit! But, other than that, this is a pretty lame attempt, and we'll be voting against it.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that the motion be agreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [17:13]<br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>52</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Andrews, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Archer, B. K.</name>
                  <name>Bell, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Birrell, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Boyce, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Buchholz, S.</name>
                  <name>Caldwell, C. M.</name>
                  <name>Chester, D. J.</name>
                  <name>Coleman, D. B.</name>
                  <name>Conaghan, P. J.</name>
                  <name>Coulton, M. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Dutton, P. C.</name>
                  <name>Entsch, W. G.</name>
                  <name>Fletcher, P. W.</name>
                  <name>Gillespie, D. A.</name>
                  <name>Hamilton, G. R.</name>
                  <name>Hastie, A. W.</name>
                  <name>Hawke, A. G.</name>
                  <name>Hogan, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Howarth, L. R.</name>
                  <name>Joyce, B. T. G.</name>
                  <name>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>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>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>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>86</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <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>Gee, A. R.</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                  <name>Giles, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P.</name>
                  <name>Gosling, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                  <name>Hill, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Husic, E. N.</name>
                  <name>Jones, S. P.</name>
                  <name>Kearney, G. M.</name>
                  <name>Keogh, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Khalil, P.</name>
                  <name>King, C. F.</name>
                  <name>King, M. M. H.</name>
                  <name>Lawrence, T. N.</name>
                  <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                  <name>Le, D.</name>
                  <name>Leigh, A. K.</name>
                  <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                  <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                  <name>McBain, K. L.</name>
                  <name>McBride, E. M.</name>
                  <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, B. K.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, R. G.</name>
                  <name>Mulino, D.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>O'Connor, B. P. J.</name>
                  <name>Payne, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Perrett, G. D.</name>
                  <name>Phillips, F. E.</name>
                  <name>Plibersek, T. J.</name>
                  <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                  <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                  <name>Rishworth, A. L.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Rowland, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, M. M.</name>
                  <name>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>Thistlethwaite, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Vamvakinou, M.</name>
                  <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                  <name>Watts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Wells, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, J. H.</name>
                  <name>Zappia, A.</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names />
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question negatived.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division></subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>83</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Better and Fairer Schools (Information Management) Bill 2024</title>
          <page.no>83</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="r7232" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Better and Fairer Schools (Information Management) Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report from Federation Chamber</title>
            <page.no>83</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Third Reading</title>
            <page.no>83</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CLARE</name>
    <name.id>HWL</name.id>
    <electorate>Blaxland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a third time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a third time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>COMMITTEES</title>
        <page.no>83</page.no>
        <type>COMMITTEES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Human Rights Joint Committee</title>
          <page.no>83</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report</title>
            <page.no>83</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURNS</name>
    <name.id>278522</name.id>
    <electorate>Macnamara</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On behalf of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights, I present the following reports: <inline font-style="italic">Human rights scrutiny report: Report 7 of 2024</inline>and <inline font-style="italic">Annual </inline><inline font-style="italic">r</inline><inline font-style="italic">eport 2023</inline>.</para>
<para>Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e).</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURNS</name>
    <name.id>278522</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I am pleased to table the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights' seventh scrutiny report of 2024 and our annual report for 2023. In the first report the committee has considered 151 new legislative instruments, commented on five instruments and concluded its examination of one bill. For example, the committee has commented on the Online Safety (Relevant Electronic Services—Class 1A and Class 1B Material) Industry Standard 2024 and the Online Safety (Designated Internet Services—Class 1A and Class 1B Material) Industry Standard 2024. These legislative instruments established industry standards for relevant electronic services and designated internet services which include online chat services, SMS services, websites, apps and online storage services. The standards require service providers to implement measures to reduce the risk that their services will be used to solicit, generate, access, distribute and store harmful materials, including violent or exploitative materials.</para>
<para>The committee considers that this likely promotes a number of human rights, including the rights of women and children to be free from sexual expectation, the rights to life and to the security of the person, and the prohibition against inciting national, racial or religious hatred. However, the committee also notes that the measures may limit the rights to freedom of expression and privacy by requiring the regulation of certain online materials, including restricting access to, disrupting the dissemination of and removing the material. The committee is therefore seeking further information from the minister for infrastructure.</para>
<para>As the last day these instruments can be subject to parliamentary disallowance is tomorrow, the committee has resolved to place a protective notice of motion to disallow the instruments in the Senate. This is a procedural mechanism that will provide the committee with more time in which to receive a response from the minister for infrastructure to consider the human rights compatibility of the standards. It will also ensure that the parliament has the benefit of the committee's concluded assessment of these legislative instruments while they remain subject to parliamentary control.</para>
<para>I also table the committee's 2023 annual report, which details the work of the committee for the 2023 calendar year. In 2023, the committee tabled 14 scrutiny reports—not bad—examining 231 bills, and almost 2,000 legislative instruments, and commented on 37 of these.</para>
<para>During this reporting period, the committee concluded its consideration on the vast majority of bills prior to their passage. A human rights analysis was available to inform members of parliament prior to the passage of 94 per cent of bills. The committee had concluded its examination of all legislative instruments that were subject to disallowance within the disallowance timeframe.</para>
<para>During 2023, the committee continued to meet both during and outside of sittings. This was a practice that commenced during the COVID-19 pandemic and has greatly assisted in ensuring the timeliness of the committee's regular scrutiny reports.</para>
<para>The annual report also provides information about the work of the committee, including some major themes and scrutiny issues arising from the legislation examined by the committee, and the initiation of two inquiries during the reporting period.</para>
<para>The Attorney-General asked the committee to inquire into Australia's Human Rights Framework and report to parliament by 31 March 2024. It was a big piece of work. The committee received 335 public submissions, over 4,000 form or campaign letters and held six public hearings. It heard evidence from a range of community groups, religious organisations, government bodies and experts.</para>
<para>The committee was also given the function to review compulsory enhanced income management and compulsory income management for compatibility with human rights and report to the parliament by 4 September this year, which we will do.</para>
<para>It was a big year in the Parliamentary Joint Committee of Human Rights last year. I want to thank the deputy chair—the member for Bowman, all of the committee members and, of course, the incredible secretariat of the Parliamentary Joint Committee of Human Rights. They are outstanding public servants and the chair is very grateful for all of their work.</para>
<para>I encourage all members to consider our committee's reports closely. With these comments I commend the committee's <inline font-style="italic">Human rights</inline><inline font-style="italic">scrutiny report</inline><inline font-style="italic">: report</inline><inline font-style="italic"> 7 of 2024</inline> and the annual report of 2023 to the House.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>84</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (Declared Areas) Bill 2024, Criminal Code Amendment (Deepfake Sexual Material) Bill 2024</title>
          <page.no>84</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <p>
              <a href="r7170" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (Declared Areas) Bill 2024</span>
                </p>
              </a>
            </p>
            <a href="r7205" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Criminal Code Amendment (Deepfake Sexual Material) Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Returned from Senate</title>
            <page.no>84</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Migration Amendment (Overseas Organ Transplant Disclosure and Other Measures) Bill 2023</title>
          <page.no>84</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="s1384" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Migration Amendment (Overseas Organ Transplant Disclosure and Other Measures) Bill 2023</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>First Reading</title>
            <page.no>84</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Future Made in Australia Bill 2024, Future Made in Australia (Omnibus Amendments No. 1) Bill 2024</title>
          <page.no>84</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <p>
              <a href="r7219" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Future Made in Australia Bill 2024</span>
                </p>
              </a>
            </p>
            <a href="r7223" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Future Made in Australia (Omnibus Amendments No. 1) Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>84</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms McKENZIE</name>
    <name.id>124514</name.id>
    <electorate>Flinders</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The bills we are debating here today—the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 and the Future Made in Australia (Omnibus Amendments No. 1) Bill 2024—really do send a message to the Australian public and our key trading partners that this Albanese government is turning its back on being an open and efficient trading nation. Australia's enduring economic success has been dependent on our openness to global markets, and successive governments have had a light touch, enhancing our competitive advantage in both goods and services. The legislation before us today goes back to that tired, old catchcry that sustains the Labor movement: government good, private sector bad. It picks winners and inserts public ownership into our industrial ecosystem all while solidifying the union movement's centrality and censorship in terms of what gets done in this country and what does not get done. In that, as in so many other respects, it is yet another CFMEU payday.</para>
<para>I want to start with what I consider to be some of the most egregious parts of this legislation, hidden amongst the froth and bubble and self-congratulatory backslapping of those on the other side, who claim to be backing in Australia's strengths. There are substantive changes to the Export Finance Australia body, which has been an essential part of Australia's success as an export and trading nation, whose expert advice and judicious investment have created countless success stories in Australian know-how, goods and services being exported to the world for more than 30 years.</para>
<para>Back then, the Export Finance and Insurance Corporation, or EFIC as it was known, was created expressly to support Australian businesses in their export trade and overseas infrastructure development. It did this by offering loans, guarantees and insurance to help businesses manage the financial risks associated with exporting; by financing infrastructure projects abroad that involved Australian companies; and by working with private-sector banks and other financial institutions to encourage them to finance exports and overseas projects. More often than not, if EFIC, later known as the EFA, agreed to invest in a good or service, it gave the market a strong indication that the project had substance and credibility and was likely to succeed in its target market. In doing so, EFIC did not replace private-sector investment, but its astute decision-making led others to take a risk knowing it had passed EFIC's rigorous assessment.</para>
<para>I'd like to give you some examples of the critical difference EFIC made to Australia's exporting success, ranging from the big to the small. In 2014, through the National Interest Account, it supported PNG's liquefied natural gas project, developing a major LNG project with Australian know-how and investment and ultimately making a huge contribution to the economy of Papua New Guinea and strengthening trade ties between Australia and PNG. But EFIC was equally if not more impactful in the small-business end of the market. By way of example, in 2014, EFIC provided a modest $600,000 to Astec Paints in South Australia to increase its presence in China, Korea, Japan and Middle Eastern markets. But it needed help to meet demand from Japanese clients for its elastomeric coatings, which met Japan's strict building codes at the time. The commercial bank was supportive of plans to increase production, but it just needed additional security, which EFIC was able to provide by way of an export working capital guarantee.</para>
<para>The following is another example. In 2016 an EFIC small-business export loan helped Frankland Islands Cruises increase its Japanese exports, entering into a charter program with a Japanese travel provider bringing people to Australia to enjoy the Great Barrier Reef. The expansion would have meant 30 per cent of their revenue, but they needed new equipment to ensure contract delivery. EFIC's modest loan of just $190,000 under its small-business export loan program allowed Frankland Islands Cruises to tailor the repayment term to meet their needs. This is one of so very many small businesses which EFIC was able to help.</para>
<para>Between 2013 and 2016, concurrently with the Abbott government signing world-leading free trade agreements with Japan, South Korea and China, it provided millions of dollars to small and medium-sized enterprises, enabling them to make early gains under these FTAs, which were best in class at the time of their signing. The special small-business export loan was created in 2014, and between 2013 and 2016 more than $100 million was directed towards the sector. Operating at arm's length from government, the EFA, and before it EFIC, only had occasional recourse to the trade minister. It obviously operated by taking into account the Australian government's trade priorities, ensuring that Australian businesses were able to make the most of new market opportunities that were opened by government secured trade deals.</para>
<para>By golly, the coalition government kept EFIC busy. Between 2013 and 2022, there had been the most rapid negotiation, conclusion and ratification of high-quality FTAs. In 2014 alone, there was a deal done with China, Japan and South Korea and subsequent deal closures were not far off with Hong Kong, Indonesia, India, the UK and finally the CPTPP. I remember it all well because at the time I was the trade minister's chief of staff and we worked at breakneck speed to meet the Prime Minister's demand at the time of getting three deals done within just 12 months. EFIC's work was essential in reaping the benefits of those FTAs, and its focus was singular: build new and stronger markets for Australia's exports, make sure the world has access to the stuff we are good at on our own, without government handouts and interference in picking winners. To enable it to do its work, the former coalition increased EFIC's funding in 2014 by $200 million and then later again in 2019, when it expanded its callable capital to $1.2 billion.</para>
<para>When you look beneath the hood of the industry minister's 'back to the 1970s' industrial policy encapsulated in these bills, you find meaningful, enduring and, may I say, mission-crushing changes to the EFA, giving it the power to make:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… domestically focused investments under the National Interest Account (NIA), following referral to Government and commercial assessment, to fund domestic projects where support is not available through existing funds and programs.</para></quote>
<para>Basically, its remit is now that of a domestic bank, backing government picked projects. The EFA, or EFIC, will now have a somewhat Orwellian termed national economy function, which is to encourage and facilitate eligible activities that support Australia's economic resilience and security. Possibly even more economy shackling is EFIC's net zero function, which should leave us all wondering whether this government values net zero above our achievements as a dynamic, vibrant, successful and enduring trading nation.</para>
<para>The Albanese government does not hide the fact that it's turning its back on boosting our exports through free trade. In section 2.10 of the explanatory memorandum to these bills, it states:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Schedule 1 to the Omnibus Bill allows EFA to disregard two of its primary duties for the purposes of enabling EFA to perform its new national economy and net zero functions. These primary duties—</para></quote>
<para>which are now to be disregarded—</para>
<quote><para class="block">are that it performs its functions in such a manner as will best assist the development of Australian export trade—</para></quote>
<para>remember, that's the part that's to be disregarded—</para>
<quote><para class="block">and that it has regard to the desirability of improving and extending the range of insurance and other financial services and products available (whether from EFIC or otherwise) to persons involved, or likely to be involved, directly or indirectly, in Australian export trade.</para></quote>
<para>That's no longer core business for the EFA.</para>
<para>In making these changes to the EFA, Labor has effectively transformed the EFA's role from an independently managed, outward-facing, export-driving investment vehicle to a domestic bank for domestic projects or to bankroll big-ticket items for reportedly good mates of the government like PsiQuantum. At the same time, Labor has extended the fingers of the government's hand into the decision-making of the EFC.</para>
<para>In a recent podcast by Australian trade experts Dr Pru Gordon, executive director of the Australian Centre for International Trade and Investment, and Professor Peter Draper, executive director of the Institute for International Trade at the University of Adelaide, Dr Gordon said: 'Export Finance Australia has two accounts. One is the commercial account and one is the national interest account. And all of the Future Made in Australia programs will fall under the national interest account. Now, decisions as to whether EFA even considers a project for funding will be a decision made by the minister. It's not a decision made by Export Finance Australia. The amending legislation that comes with the Future Made in Australia legislation in relation to EFA clearly says they have to take a project to the minister for the minister's decision, even if it doesn't meet with any of EFA's criteria as to whether it should be funded or not. So that's the national interest account. EFA, they are not experts on the projects that they fund. They are experts on financing projects but not on the projects that they fund.'</para>
<para>Dr Gordon went on: 'And I know for projects that they've funded on the national interest account in the past they have relied on private sector advisers as to whether the project warrants funding and is going to be a good investment or not.' For those who are curious, I commend this podcast to listeners at home: Trade Policy Decoded Episode 15: the re-emergence of industry policy and a Future Made in Australia. It's dated 7 August. When you take these changes to the EFA and you hold them up to the contributions to this debate from those on the other side, you would be right to ask yourself whether the Albanese Labor government is turning its back on global trade, trade agreements and, indeed, the network of trade agreements, which has made Australia such a strong global economy despite her relative size. It's worth looking at Labor's record in this space as a backdrop to these bills. The Albanese government implemented the UK FTA, concluded by the previous coalition government, and the Indian FTA, equally concluded by the previous coalition government. The only one they really had to achieve for themselves on their own scorecard was the EU FTA, for which—yet again—much of the work had already been done by the previous coalition government and the previous trade minister, who's just come into the chamber.</para>
<para>They started well on the EU FTA, and then progress came to a sudden stop in October of last year. Subsequent opportunities for revival of negotiations such as at the WTO ministerial in Abu Dhabi in February were not seized. The agreement at this point is effectively dead. It is worth taking stock of what this government has lost by deserting well-advanced free trade negotiations with like-minded partners in favour of the picking-winners, Made-in-Australia, protectionist industry policy encapsulated in these bills.</para>
<para>Made up of over 450 million consumers, the EU has a combined GDP of some US$17 trillion. The EU is a vital partner for Australian manufacturing, automotive business, science and research as well as the digital economy and financial services. Last October, there were high and reasonably founded expectations that a deal would be done. The EU had sent its vice-president and agricultural commissioner to run down any final skirmishes in Australia in the very non-European setting of Osaka. Negotiators, business and industry representatives, and our exporters had all turned up in significant numbers to see the Australian FTA flag thrown over the last missing megamarket in Australia's FTA net. In the lead-up, progress had been made in relation to key priorities for Australia—certainly in relation to red meat and sugar. It was of course not as much as our agricultural industries wanted, because it is never enough for what they want and they are right to be ambitious when they produce the best beef and lamb and finest sugar in the world.</para>
<para>However, the EU had found a way to expand their earlier offers two- or threefold, depending on the quota and the cut of meat. The EU's market access offer would have been worth more than $1 billion a year in new agricultural market access and reduced the cost of environmental technology such as wind turbines, which currently attract a five per cent tariff, resulting in Chinese turbines being the cheapest choice in Australia. Tariffs on minerals, metals, wood, paper and chemicals would also have been removed. The deal would have expanded trade in energy raw materials, ensuring Australia was sharing her precious critical minerals and resources with like-minded nations. The EU had given ground on those pesky geographic indicators, agreeing that Australian companies already established in the market will be able to continue using these terms, often reflecting their original European heritage or establishment. But back in October the final negotiations were over before they began, with the trade minister abruptly informing the Europeans on negotiation eve that there was nothing to discuss the next day. The Europeans were stumped. They hadn't seen the about-turn coming. They had been given every indication to the contrary. It was a betrayal of years of progress and, at the time, the Europeans didn't just think they had been deceived by the sudden turnaround; they knew they had been. It was obvious someone had pulled the leash on the Australian side.</para>
<para>One outstanding issue, relating to importing talent, bringing European professionals with discrete skills to Australia, is what most people believe was the sticking point. The abolition of labour market testing in discrete technical industries, so despised by the Australian union movement, had precipitated the Albanese government's turnaround. Few here would remember the vicious campaign run by the union movement against the China free trade agreement, which equally abolished labour market testing for some specialised skills. At the time, the CFMEU and ETU ran full-page ads in the paper, online and television ads and even went as far as robocalls. At the time, those CFMEU-sponsored ads said: 'Do you know what Tony Abbott's free trade deal with China means? Chinese companies can fly people into work without ever having to look around for local staff.' It was a blunt, racist fear campaign which in the end amounted to nothing. The deal was done and there was no flood of workers.</para>
<para class="italic"><inline font-style="italic">(Quorum formed)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs ELLIOT</name>
    <name.id>DZW</name.id>
    <electorate>Richmond</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 and the Future Made in Australia (Omnibus Amendments No. 1) Bill 2024. As the House well knows, the Albanese Labor government is taking every measure to seize the opportunities before us and to drive our economy so everyone in our nation benefits, and the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 is at the heart of our government's vision for a stronger, more prosperous, more resilient and more diversified Australian economy. We know how important it is to have that diversity and strength right across our economy, particularly across our regions.</para>
<para>Today and every day, our government is working to help Australians who are under financial pressure. We know people are doing it tough, and that's why we're acting on cost of living and boosting wages, at the same time we're delivering those very important tax cuts to every Australian taxpayer, making sure that Australians can earn more and keep more of what they earn. In my electorate of Richmond on the New South Wales North Coast, more than 70,000 taxpayers benefit from these tax cuts. So we are absolutely making sure that we are doing a number of projects to make sure we can ease some of those cost-of-living pressures. We know there is more to do and we know people are doing it tough, but we have a whole range of measures. The energy bill relief, that $300 for every household, is vitally important as well. Every household benefits from that. We're also making sure people benefit from cheaper child care, cheaper medicines and fee-free TAFE. There are so many more who have been able to access TAFE because of our fee-free TAFE policies.</para>
<para>So the government is delivering economic security for all Australians, and we want, of course, to build on that and continue that by making more things here in Australia. That's what the centrepiece of this bill does: making more things in this nation. It certainly is a call that I hear from people in my electorate all the time: 'We should be making more things here, using our resources and our people, creating more jobs and being able to make a lot more here.' Indeed, as they say to me all the time, we should be making our nation a renewable energy superpower. That's what we are committed to doing. All of that makes our economy more resilient and more secure. We also want to make it easy for companies to invest in new projects and create new jobs, particularly in our regions.</para>
<para>The government's Future Made in Australia plan is about maximising the economic and industrial benefits of the global transformation to net zero and securing Australia's place in a changing global economic landscape. It will help Australia build a stronger, more diversified and more resilient economy powered by renewable energy. We know how important that is. It'll create more secure, well-paid jobs and encourage and facilitate the private sector investment required to make our nation an indispensable part of the global net zero economy.</para>
<para>This bill and omnibus bill deliver on key elements of the government's Future Made in Australia plan, which we announced in our budget this year. They impose rigour on government decision-making and help give investors the clarity and certainty they need to invest and unlock growth in our economy.</para>
<para>The Future Made in Australia Bill includes three components. Firstly, the bill embeds the government's new National Interest Framework to help identify where Australia has a genuine comparative advantage in the net zero economy or where we have an economic security and resilience imperative. It also establishes a robust sector assessment process to help improve understanding of how government can best leverage private investment in areas of the economy aligned with the framework. Furthermore, this bill defines a set of community benefit principles, which are so important to ensure the benefits of a future made in Australia and the private sector investment that it enables flow to local communities, workers and businesses. It's vitally important to have that community benefit principle.</para>
<para>The bill contains amendments to implement key Future Made in Australia initiatives announced in the budget this year. Some of those amendments include enabling Export Finance Australia to make domestically focused investments under the National Interest Account in alignment with the National Interest Framework and safeguarding $6 billion in funding for ARENA's renewables and related priorities, giving industry and investors certainty to deliver sizeable, long-term and long-lasting projects. That's what we need to have in this country.</para>
<para>The Future Made in Australia Bill embeds that National Interest Framework, which, as I said, was announced in the budget. The framework will support Australian government consideration and decision-making in relation to significant public investment that then also unlocks private investment at scale in the national interest. This really is a visionary bill and a move by this government to secure that investment for the future. Codifying the framework in legislation will help provide certainty to the investment community and bring additional rigour to government decision-making.</para>
<para>The National Interest Framework includes two streams. The first is the net zero transformation stream, which covers sectors that could have a sustained comparative advantage in a net zero global economy and where public investment is likely to be needed for the sector to make emissions reductions. The other stream is economic resilience and security, which covers sectors where some level of domestic capability is a necessary or efficient way to deliver economic resilience and security. The private sector will not deliver that necessary investment in the absence of government support. That's why it's so vitally important to have this government's support to drive this.</para>
<para>The bill enables sector assessments which assess the extent to which a sector aligns with the National Interest Framework and those opportunities to address some of the barriers to private investment in our nation's interest. These assessments will help inform robust government decision-making on significant public investments that aim to unlock that private investment. The bill allows for the minister to provide guidance regarding matters relevant to the assessments, such as government priorities or net zero transformation or economic security and resilience considerations that have motivated the referral.</para>
<para>Our government wants to ensure that public investment and private investment flow to communities in a way that really benefits the community, provides the jobs and provides the support for those families and workers in those areas. To enable this, the following community benefit principles must be applied to the Future Made in Australia supports identified in the bill. The benefit principles include:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Promote safe and secure jobs that are well paid and have good conditions;</para></quote>
<para>That's certainly what I hear from people in my region and right throughout the country, particularly in regions. They need to have safe and secure jobs that provide for individuals and their families, and that then drives local economies and the national economy.</para>
<para>Another principle is:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Develop more skilled and inclusive workforces, including by investing in training and skills development and broadening opportunities for workforce participation;</para></quote>
<para>That has been at the heart of all of the actions of this government. We are making sure that people are able to access more training and skills and that they have a wider range of opportunities for workforce participation.</para>
<para>The other principles are:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Engage collaboratively with and achieve positive outcomes for local communities, such as First Nations communities and communities directly affected by the transition to net zero;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Strengthen domestic industrial capabilities including through stronger local supply chains; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Demonstrate transparency and compliance in relation to the management of tax affairs, including benefits received under Future Made in Australia Supports.</para></quote>
<para>These community benefit principles will be applied on a program-by-program basis. Of course, further details to satisfy these requirements will be subject to consultation.</para>
<para>Above all, this bill speaks to our unwavering determination to shape the future—not wait for the future to shape us—and to drive our economy through this investment. Of course, we do know that those in opposition, the Liberals and the Nationals, don't really support what's at the heart of this bill. We know, because their speakers have come here and talked about this bill, that they just don't want our country to excel in efficient, low-cost, renewable energy. We know how important it is to drive our economy and to address climate change. We know how important it is to provide jobs, which are essential to our economic growth.</para>
<para>What do those on the opposition benches want? They want to hold us back with dangerous and expensive nuclear energy, which we know will also drive up power prices. That's all they have. It is a shame but, indeed, no surprise. They're always doing the opposite of what's actually good for our country and good for our economy. We know that the biggest threat to Australian jobs and investment is sitting across from us on the opposition benches. We know that, because they just aren't interested in programs and policies to drive our economy.</para>
<para>Their record in this House is somewhat atrocious. They voted against the National Reconstruction Fund; that's hard to believe. They voted against energy bill relief and all of the important initiatives to assist Australians. They say fee-free TAFE was a waste of money. Look at the hundreds of thousands of people that have benefitted from it. I speak to people every day who would not have been able to access training without fee-free TAFE. When they were in government, the Liberals and the Nationals gutted the CSIRO. We know that everyday Australians were worse off when the Leader of the Opposition was the Minister for Health. I know, in particular, that elderly people in my electorate were worse off. Who can forget the GP tax? It was horrific. Who can forget when doctors voted the then health minister, now the Leader of the Opposition, the worst in Australian political history. Indeed, those in the opposition just want to hold us back.</para>
<para>In contrast, the agenda of our government—the Albanese Labor government—and our Prime Minister is to hold no-one back and leave no-one behind. The legislation before us today has that principle at its absolute core, because Future Made in Australia is about unlocking private investment in jobs in industry and energy around our nation. It is a unique opportunity to provide for the future of this nation and for future jobs growth through driving our local economy. Of course, it's about making our country a renewable energy superpower. We have the capacity to do that, and that is why this bill absolutely should be passed.</para>
<para>In conclusion, our country has the resources, ingenuity and determination to do that. We have the capacity to do it, and we must do it. We must do it for our economy's future and for the provision of future jobs. We know how important that is. I commend this bill to the House. It is transformative for the future of our nation.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs McINTOSH</name>
    <name.id>281513</name.id>
    <electorate>Lindsay</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>If this Albanese Labor government wants to make more products in Australia then I have a big tip for the Prime Minister: our manufacturers and small businesses need cheaper, reliable and secure power. Our Aussie manufacturers are crying out for more gas supply in the domestic market to bring down the cost of doing business. Small businesses want to see their energy bills lowered, not continuing to rise.</para>
<para>Instead, the bills being debated today, the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 and the Future Made in Australia (Omnibus Amendments No. 1) Bill 2024, would enhance the Minister for Climate Change and Energy's ability to drive his all-eggs-in-one-basket, renewables-only approach when it comes to our nation's energy grid. I understand that the omnibus bill expands the Australian Renewable Energy Agency's function from research and development and demonstration to supporting manufacturing, deployment and commercialisation. ARENA has always been an R&D agency, and this is clear in its remit. When the Labor Party was in opposition they opposed expanding the remit to cover sensible net zero related R&D expenditure, including for carbon capture and storage and for blue hydrogen. But now that they're in government and are on an ideological steam train to attempt to power the nation on only renewables, they have changed their minds.</para>
<para>Why not add in uranium and the ability for our country to have 24/7 baseload nuclear power to ensure our energy security? After all, the wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't always shine. The media has been writing constantly about the energy crisis facing this nation because of the government's approach, with wind droughts and potential outages because of a lack of gas. They now want to expand ARENA's powers to incorporate projects they want to see get up—more renewables—rather than having the agency assist with research and development efforts. If this is going to be the case, then what's next for the Clean Energy Finance Corporation? Even further, the Minister for Climate Change and Energy will be able to pump more taxpayer dollars into his reckless renewables-only approach with the stroke of a pen. There will be no parliamentary oversight and no scrutiny, just some delegated legislation and, in an election year, $3.98 billion can walk out the door.</para>
<para>We know that the Productivity Commission recently said the Albanese Labor government's $1 billion Solar Sunshot program should be retrospectively subjected to a tougher National Interest Framework test. Even the Treasurer's hand-picked productivity commissioner knows this government is making up policy on the run. What's worse is that $1 billion of taxpayer money is attached. She also went on to say:</para>
<quote><para class="block">If we are supporting industries that don't have a long-term competitive advantage, that can be an ongoing cost. It diverts resources, that's workers and capital, away from other parts of the economy where they might generate high value uses.</para></quote>
<para>The Treasury secretary has refused to back the project as well.</para>
<para>Why are ministers afraid to put these projects with large sums of public money forward for adequate scrutiny? I thought this was going to be an open government, a government of transparency. This was obviously another broken promise to the Australian people. The Treasury was apparently not consulted on the decision to invest in solar manufacturing, and their analysis afterwards demonstrated that it was not a sound investment. We need to put the public's money towards projects that are backed in by experts with public servant advice and that meet the pub test. Let's help our current businesses continue to stay open and to thrive in an economy that actually works.</para>
<para>The coalition isn't against solar. In fact, we are proud that Australia is the best nation in the world for rooftop solar. We want to see public investment in areas where we can be competitive, successful and rewarded with thriving industries, not propped up ones. Unfortunately, insolvencies have tripled since this Labor government took office in 2022. You could say it's ridiculous, but it's actually heartbreaking. Australia should be a place for the fair go, but, increasingly, the policy settings and bills being put forward by the government are not conducive to this. So many of our domestic manufacturers right across Greater Western Sydney rely on gas to power their businesses. But the government won't invest in more gas or things like carbon capture and storage and blue hydrogen. Our local manufacturers are proud to make Aussie products on a daily basis, but, because of the energy market and industry policies of this government, we're seeing record numbers of manufacturers closing their doors. In turn, everyday Australians are losing their jobs and livelihoods. These small, medium and large-scale manufacturers need cheaper power prices right now to survive in the current economic climate.</para>
<para>In my Western Sydney community, I recently visited a local steel manufacturer in Emu Plains. The manager told me the company's gas bill had risen about 40 per cent since Labor took office. This is extraordinary, but it gets worse. An advanced defence manufacturing industry in Jamisontown told me their energy costs have grown by an astronomical 100 per cent. They looked into the government's solar for business scheme to get government assistance, but it was not feasible for their business. The director told me that it didn't matter about the number of solar panels that they could put on their roof, because the amount of power produced would not be enough to ensure that they could power their business. They could maybe only power the office. Additionally, the structure of the roof would not be able to hold the solar panels. This local manufacturer needs gas, and it needs it at an affordable price.</para>
<para>More supply will bring down the cost of gas, particularly for heavy industry. These are manufacturers that are crying out for good, long-term contracts, but they're starting to get worried about domestic supply due to the lack of approval coming from the Albanese Labor government. Small businesses, particularly in Western Sydney, where the cost-of-living crunch is unbearable, need effective policies—not a small $325 handout, which will realistically go nowhere in terms of paying the real costs of the energy they need to create products, operate their business and employ so many locals.</para>
<para>Last week we saw business closure statistics released. The stats were dire for Western Sydney. CreditorWatch's most recent update of its business risk index noted that 90 per cent of Australia will see an increase in the number of business failures in the year ahead. From this dataset, Western Sydney is one of the two hardest hit regions in our country. Our manufacturers and our small businesses are struggling so much right now. We need good industry policy in competitive industries to get our country ahead. But instead of doing so, and fighting for jobs that will lead us back to the head of the pack, we have a government that is focused on paying for projects that suit their ideological positioning on energy. We need to see real, positive signals from government to ensure private sector support across industry, including gas, resources and renewables. But, when a government is solely focused on renewables and putting public money through these bills' mechanisms towards them, we can fail as a nation. We don't want more blackouts and brownouts. We need to have policies that will stimulate the economy and ensure people, businesses, small businesses and manufacturers right across the country can thrive on their own. There needs to be the right tax incentives in place for business to invest in Australia as well. We are seeing disastrous economy, industry and energy policies that are impacting manufacturers, small businesses and, in turn, the lives of everyday families across this nation. We've seen 12 mortgage rate rises under the Albanese Labor government. Real wages have slumped nine per cent. There has been an eight per cent drop in living standards. Household savings have dipped by 10 per cent. Going to the bowser for petrol and getting fresh food and vegetables have become more expensive as well.</para>
<para>In my patch, as the shadow minister for energy affordability, it's absolutely heartbreaking to hear the stories of families that cannot pay to keep the lights on. Dual-income households across Penrith are asking food banks to help them pay their bills. They are doing that because they are too proud to take food away from the homeless. This is the economy we are living in right now due to the failure of economic, industry and energy policies by those opposite. More than 600 households are applying for energy hardship payments every single week. Industry and households are paying well above 20 per cent more for their power than they did during the last coalition government. To make the energy, cost-of-living and manufacturing crises much worse, we have a Labor government that is currently overseeing 90 per cent of 24/7 baseload power leaving the energy system over the next few years. It's laughable that the Prime Minister, when he was leading the opposition, quipped:</para>
<quote><para class="block">At the end of the first term of a Labor Government, when we reflect on what we have built, we'll see this … an economy that makes more things here at home, powered by cheap renewable energy.</para></quote>
<para>Isn't the opposite of that statement true? Our Aussie manufacturers are paying some of the highest prices on the globe for energy.</para>
<para>If it weren't so sad, it would be laughable that this Labor government think they will power ahead with a future made in Australia without an energy policy that will supply consistent, reliable and secure power for industry and businesses. The government cannot solve the industry issues in this country by continuing to funnel public funds into projects to meet their own interim climate change targets without thinking about the energy, security and costs facing Australia. It's time for the government to admit their faults and step back from these bills as they currently read.</para>
<para>Better industry comes from providing the correct economic policies to provide an environment that will help business flourish. The coalition in government will do three things in this space: we will steer our nation out of our multiple current domestic crises; we'll not just talk about the challenges of our time but we'll meet them head on, with action to carve out a more secure future; and, most importantly, we'll make the decisions that set Australia up for success for many generations to come. There are six core ways to get this done. We will rein in inflationary spending to take pressure off inflation rather than spend billions on corporate welfare for the Labor Party's pet projects. We'll wind back Labor's interventions by removing regulatory roadblocks that are causing harm to the economy and stopping so many businesses from getting ahead. We will condense approval processes and remove red-tape barriers that continue to harm mining, entrepreneurialism and jobs. The coalition will remove the complexity and hostility of this Labor government's industrial relations agenda that is putting imposts on businesses, particularly casual-worker changes impacting our small businesses. Under a coalition government, we will provide lower, simpler and fairer taxes, as all Australians should keep more of what they earn. We need changes to competition policy to give businesses a fair go and ensure projects receiving government funding meet adequate tests, which is of concern in these bills. We will ensure Australians have more affordable and reliable energy. As the bill reads, the coalition opposes them.</para>
<para>We need a government that believes in providing cheaper, reliable and secure energy for this nation. No-one wants to just back in renewable projects. The coalition wants renewables to be built here, and by taking the energy grid, but they need to be backed by 24/7 baseload power that gas and nuclear can provide and which the government does not want to explore under these bills. Only the coalition can truly bring back 'Aussie Made'.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">Quorum formed.</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PLIBERSEK</name>
    <name.id>83M</name.id>
    <electorate>Sydney</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to thank the member for calling the quorum to make sure I had some of my colleagues here. It's wonderful! It gives me the opportunity to tell the chamber some things. I'm sorry that the member for Lindsay has gone. I was going to school her a bit on some of the things that she got wrong. I don't have time to go through all the things that she got wrong. But we on this side know that we inherited a cost-of-living crisis. We know. Everything we've done every day since being elected has been aimed at dealing with that cost-of-living crisis. Is it job done? No way. We don't accept for a moment that it's job done. But, at every step of the way, we have been opposed by those opposite. We have delivered better tax cuts and fairer tax cuts, more for low- and middle-income Australians and less for me. That's fair enough. I'm happy with that. We have delivered real wage rises for the first time in a decade. Those opposite confessed that, under their government, low wages were a deliberate design feature of their economic architecture. They said it. We didn't say it about them; they said it. We know that that's what would happen if they were elected again.</para>
<para>The other thing I just wanted to mention is that the member for Lindsay was talking about, 'These are the things we need to do if we want to blah, blah, blah.' You know what? In typical fashion for the coalition parties, we heard nothing, no detail. Can you believe that almost three years into a coalition opposition, they have not a single costed policy that they will take to the next election? They have no policies to deal with the cost-of-living crisis that we admit and agree is the most important thing facing the Australian people at the moment. Instead of talking about the cost of living in here, every question every day in question time is about visas. They have the opportunity to stand up and tell the people of Australia what they would do to help with the cost of living, rather than opposing everything that we are trying to do to help with the cost of living. They're the people who set the fire and now they've put the roadblocks up so the fire engine can't get there when it comes to the cost of living. If you asked them, 'What would you do to help ordinary people with their cost of living?' what could they say? They have not a single policy to help Australians with the cost of living.</para>
<para>Moving on to this terrific piece of legislation, the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024, this morning was a great example of what a future made in Australia looks like, because we announced the environmental tick-off for Australia's largest renewable energy project and one of the largest in the world. This is something that my colleague Minister Chris Bowen has been working so hard on—to see this energy transition through. The announcement today of environmental approval for SunCable means that the Albanese Labor government has now ticked off enough renewable energy to power seven million homes. The energy transition is real. It's happening now. Cheaper, cleaner, renewable energy for households and businesses will be better for the environment, be better for jobs, bring down prices and increase certainty. We know that the SunCable project will be economically and socially transformative for the Northern Territory. Of course, it's about the power that will be exported in the future from this proposal, but it's also about the power that will be used in Darwin and what it will be used for. SunCable estimates the project will deliver more than $20 billion in economic value to the Northern Territory and support an average of 6,800 direct and indirect jobs for each year of the construction phase, with a peak workforce of 14,300. I think one of the most critical things about this is that we've managed with SunCable to design a product that actually avoids the significant negative impacts on the environment that you would normally worry about with a project of this size. They've designed the project to avoid ghost bat colonies and make sure that protected species like the greater bilby are protected with the rollout of this project.</para>
<para>One of the things that are so exciting about the Future Made in Australia Bill and the plan itself is how critical this renewable energy future is to our economy in the future. From my perspective as environment minister, of course, reducing climate related risks is one of the very best things that we can do to protect our environment. But renewable energy also means that, through our renewable energy resources here in Australia, we are uniquely placed to benefit from a transformation that's not just happening in Australia—although it is happening in Australia—but actually happening globally. There is global demand for renewable energy. We want to be able to export it, through projects like green hydrogen and this cable, in the way that we have exported coal and gas in the past, and we want to export the products that are made with renewable energy because those products will be in increasing demand around the world as economies do their best to decarbonise internationally.</para>
<para>If we want to remain competitive in this changing world, we need to have a plan, and that plan is this Future Made in Australia. It is extraordinary to see those opposite lining up to complain about this transformative opportunity that we have for this country. This plan provides clarity, certainty and a framework for companies that want to invest in new projects that create jobs and wealth, particularly in regional Australia. The only thing that we have heard about regional Australia from those opposite is that they want to build some nuclear reactors there. The idea that nuclear reactors built in 20 years time can do anything for the cost of living now or for—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Dr Webster</name>
    <name.id>281688</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Twenty?</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PLIBERSEK</name>
    <name.id>83M</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member opposite says 'not 20 years time'. Is it 15? When will they be built?</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Dr Webster</name>
    <name.id>281688</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Oh, it's not for me to say.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PLIBERSEK</name>
    <name.id>83M</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Oh, right. Apparently, it's not for the Leader of the Opposition to say either, because he hasn't said it yet! So they've got a nuclear fantasy of energy in 15 or 20 years time—the most expensive new form of energy—and they won't tell us any of the details of that. They won't release the costings. Instead, as I said this morning, we are in a transformation of the Australian economy that can bring cheaper power, the jobs that come with it and the household bill relief that comes with it, and it's happening now, not in 20 years time.</para>
<para>Our plan includes investing in renewable hydrogen, critical minerals processing, green metals, green energy technologies and low-carbon liquid fuels. The example that SunCable gave today was those energy-hungry big data centres that are being built around the world right now, particularly as AI expands. That's exactly the sort of project you would like to see this kind of renewable energy able to power, on an industrial scale, in the Northern Territory.</para>
<para>In this year's federal budget we allocated around $8 billion to scale up green hydrogen that will be used to create green steel and replace gas in other manufacturing processes. We've invested a further $7 billion for critical minerals, the minerals that are used to make electric vehicles and batteries and that go into wind turbines. We've put another $1 billion into solar manufacturing and $500 million into making batteries. Australia can be a supplier of these new technologies. We've got all the raw materials and we've got more than our share of the smarts. Instead of investing here in Australia, we've been waving goodbye to these opportunities for too long. No longer. We have a plan for Australia to benefit from this transition, for the demand for these products, to cleaner, greener energy.</para>
<para>We've already seen, as I said, a substantial increase in renewable energy in the grid. We've seen a 25 per cent increase in renewable energy already, and we are continuing to tick off renewable energy projects at record rates. I have ticked off 55 so far. They are outstripping coal and gas projects, seven to one. Those opposite like to pretend that we're talking about renewables only. Of course, that's not the case. The Greens political party like to pretend that there's nothing happening with renewable energy. Nothing could be further from the truth. We've got record numbers of renewable energy projects in the pipeline ahead of us as well. Frankly, the market has decided that this is where investment in power is going. They've worked out that it is cheaper, as well as being cleaner.</para>
<para>Of course, my water portfolio has a critical role in Future Made in Australia as well. In May, we announced that the Commonwealth will contribute $65 million towards setting up a major desalination and water transport project in the Upper Spencer Gulf as part of the Future Made in Australia plan. That project includes plans for a seawater desalination plant at Cape Hardy capable of processing 260 megalitres a day, and a 600-kilometre pipeline to transport the treated water to Whyalla and to outback mining sites like Carrapateena and Roxby Downs.</para>
<para>At the moment, mining operations in the far north draw on water from the Great Artesian Basin, and, with the sort of scaling up that we want to see, that is particularly unsustainable. The Great Artesian Basin's water covers a large part of Australia, and it's very important for all sorts of uses. The hydrogen power station proposed for Whyalla needs a reliable and abundant supply of water to convert into hydrogen for power generation, and we are very happy to be partnering with the South Australian government to explore that opportunity. We're also providing $4 million to help First Nations communities to engage with those hydrogen project developers to take advantage of the jobs that can be created in regional and remote communities with this investment. Unlocking a vibrant domestic hydrogen industry is absolutely critical to our vision of being a renewable energy superpower and for a future made in Australia.</para>
<para>Of course, our plan doesn't just rely on these direct investments alone. We need a trained and skilled workforce. Those opposite spent years running down skills in our economy. We've invested in TAFE, with 500,000 fee-free TAFE places. I want to give credit to my very good friend Brendan O'Connor, the former minister, who did such amazing work in the area of skills. He will be sorely missed in this place not only as a skilled minister but also, more particularly, as a very, very decent human being.</para>
<para>It's not just the TAFE places. It's the additional investment in universities. It's the regional university centres that we're rolling out because we know we'll need the whole range of jobs, from skilled trades to PhD engineers and scientists, and everybody in between, as we transform our economy and grasp these opportunities that are there for the taking. With cyber capability, the research that universities are doing and the partnerships that we're supporting between private businesses and these critical inputs, you can see that our future made in Australia is bright. We are able to take the opportunities that this global transformation is offering Australia. With our unique advantages—our solar, our wind, and most particularly, our people: our hardworking, skilled, clever people—we can grasp those opportunities for a future made in Australia.</para>
<para class="italic"><inline font-style="italic">(Quorum formed)</inline></para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHESTER</name>
    <name.id>IPZ</name.id>
    <electorate>Gippsland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>When it comes to this government, the Albanese government, there are three simple facts you need to keep in mind whenever you examine proposed legislation. You know that blue-collar workers are going to be sold out in a desperate bid to win over Green preferences in the urban areas. You also know that it's always a good idea to read the fine print. We've got a slogan-led recovery. Every bill has a slogan in its title, but, when you start examining the substance, you realise that the bill actually contains something very different to what you'd imagine it might contain. The final thing you always need to keep at the back of your mind on every occasion when it comes to examining the Labor Party's approach to legislation is Labor's track record. Labor cannot manage money and can't be trusted to make good decisions with the Australian taxpayers' hard-earned dollars.</para>
<para>This goes to the heart of this bill. This Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 sounds absolutely wonderful. It sounds great. But, when you start examining it closely, you realise very quickly that this is more of a strategy to win re-election. It is more of a pork-barrelling fund, with Labor trying to pick winners in industries and seats that suit them and playing favourites with certain industry groups with taxpayers' money. Labor is quite happy to gamble with taxpayers' money for ideological reasons.</para>
<para>There is something that really concerns me when I look across the frontbench. I have been here for 16 years now, so I know a lot of the Labor frontbench quite well. I know their career histories very well, indeed, and I like a lot of them—they are good people—but there's no business experience anywhere in that cabinet. Not one person in that cabinet has actually run a small business, let alone a medium sized business. So the biggest skill shortage in Australia today is actually in the Labor Party cabinet. The shortage of people with business experience is quite extraordinary. When you then go and look closely at the legislation before the House, it is exposed to so many risks—a long line-up of corporate welfare recipients trying to get their hands on the money—and is being decided by a cabinet not with business experience but based on ideology. That's what really concerns me.</para>
<para>These bills expand the role of Export Finance Australia and ARENA and establish a national interest framework that retrospectively underpins the government's Future Made in Australia policy. The omnibus bill also expands ARENA's functions, from a pure R&D demonstration to the support of manufacturing, deployment and commercialisation. This is a slush fund, plain and simple, as many on this side of the House have identified very quickly in the debate. When I say it's ideologically driven, what concerns me is that, in my own electorate, we have projects which have been well researched and well considered by the coalition when it was in government and also by the state Labor Party when it has been in government in Victoria—projects like the Hydrogen Energy Supply Chain project. This project, at Loy Yang, in Gippsland, has attracted corporate support and large commitments from the Japanese government, but the federal Labor Party, this government, for ideological reasons will not support the Hydrogen Energy Supply Chain project, in Gippsland, because it utilises brown coal. It's obsessed with destroying the brown coal sector in Gippsland.</para>
<para>Brown coal has been an incredible resource in Gippsland and has underpinned the wealth of much of south-east Australia. Ever since Sir John Monash established the SEC a hundred years ago, the reliable and affordable energy generated from Latrobe Valley using brown coal has been critically important to the wealth of my community and the growth of Victoria more broadly. It's a resource that, using modern technology, research and projects—like the Hydrogen Energy Supply Chain project—will demonstrate that there are alternative uses for brown coal. It doesn't have to be put into a coal-fired power station and burnt purely for energy generation. There are other alternative uses for that product.</para>
<para>But, for ideological reasons, this once-great party, which once stood up for blue-collar workers, is quite happily seeing the demise of the entire sector and the demise of workers and families who rely on the brown coal industry. What we're seeing in my community is that, for ideological reasons, Labor, in pursuit of Green preferences, has forgotten the workers who used to underpin this once-great party.</para>
<para>You don't have to take my word for it; you can just examine the Australian Electoral Commission results during my time in this place, in the last 16 years. At election after election, the vote for me and the coalition has grown in Latrobe Valley, which was once a Labor Party heartland. The Labor Party doesn't even hold the state seat of Morwell anymore, a seat which was once a blue-ribbon seat for that party. It's all because this party, those opposite, have forgotten who they represent and have sold out blue-collar workers, all for Green preferences in the city.</para>
<para>But it's not just the coalition which is raising concerns with the bill before the House. Danielle Wood, the productivity commissioner and the government's key economic adviser, appointed by the Treasurer, Jim Chalmers, has said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">If we are supporting industries that don't have a long-term competitive advantage, that can be an ongoing cost.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">…   …   …</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">We risk creating a class of businesses that is reliant on government subsidies, and that can be very effective in coming back for more.</para></quote>
<para>This, again, goes to the heart of my concerns that a cabinet with no experience running their own business are somehow going to pick the winners through this Future Made in Australia Bill. It concerns me because the lack of business expertise and the risk to Australian taxpayers' money is going to be exposed over many years and at great cost to Australian taxpayers. In the middle of a cost-of-living crisis, Australian taxpayers are going to be footing the bill as the Albanese government tries to pick winners in the corporate sector.</para>
<para>Now, the previous speaker, the Minister for the Environment and Water, talked about energy security, and it is a very important debate to have in the context of this bill. There will be no future made in Australia unless there is reliable and affordable energy in our nation. As I touched on before, in the La Trobe Valley, with the brown-coal-fired power stations, the reliability and the affordability of that resource underpinned great economic wealth for my region and Victoria more broadly. The people in my community are perhaps a little more energy literate than those in most communities because of the fact that they've lived it. It's been where generations of people have gone to work. They understand what I call the energy trifecta, where your energy needs to be reliable, it needs to be affordable and you need to do your share as a nation in terms of contributing to the environmental outcomes the planet is seeking to achieve.</para>
<para>The energy trifecta is a difficult one because reliability and affordability are very pressing concerns for the industry, for the environmental movement and for those of us who care about the future of the planet and what our future generations will get to experience on this planet. We want to make sure we're good environmental citizens. When I look around my community, when I look around regional Australia, all I see is people who are actually passionate and practical environmentalists. It's the people in regional Australia who join Landcare, who undertake the practical environmental work and who are out there doing pest animal control, weed control and replanting vegetation. So to have those opposite come in here and lecture regional Australians as if they don't care about the environment is completely misplaced criticism and unfair to regional Australians.</para>
<para>When I talk about the energy trifecta in regional Australia, I want to make those opposite understand that the people in my community want a balanced approach. They don't want to see a government put all its eggs in one basket on a renewables-only approach. It is madness, at a time when those opposite and, in particular, the crossbench warn about more severe and unpredictable weather events, to then say, 'Let's have a 100 per cent weather-dependent energy system.' It is madness. You have warnings about climate. You have warnings about increased variability in weather events and more severe weather events, and then you put all your eggs in a 100 per cent weather-dependent basket. It is complete madness.</para>
<para>On this side of the House, we believe in a balanced approach. The overwhelming majority of people in the coalition, and certainly in my party room, acknowledge that there is a role for renewable energy sources. But it has to be based on respect for landowners, respect for the communities which will host them and an understanding that you can't put all your eggs in that one basket.</para>
<para>It has been extraordinarily condescending to listen to many of those opposite try to invoke <inline font-style="italic">The Simpsons</inline> when anyone wants to have a conversation about the future of nuclear energy in this country. It's condescending because it ignores the fact that there are more than 30 countries around the world safely operating nuclear power stations today with modern technology. It's actually quite juvenile. It's juvenile and it's demeaning to have Labor MPs continually joking about three-eyed fish. If that's your reference point for this debate, you really have exited the whole conversation that needs to be had in this nation.</para>
<para>Australians aren't interested in a scare campaign; they want a facts campaign. They want to know how these other countries are running these nuclear power stations safely and how they are storing the waste products safely. They want to know what the cost is to households and the manufacturing sector. And then they also want to know what the lifetime costs of the wind turbines and the solar panels are. Can you recycle them? What is the cost of doing that? Who's responsible for bringing down the wind turbines once they reach the end of their useful life? Well, it appears it's the landowners, at great cost to them personally. Also, what is the return to those regional communities that are expected to host this industrial-scale land use on what used to be prime agricultural land? This is a complex debate, and it can't be dumbed down to stupid references about <inline font-style="italic">The Simpsons</inline>.</para>
<para>At a time when our nation provides an incredible amount of food to other countries in the world, surely taking away productive agricultural land and turning it into a wind factory or a solar farm needs to have a little bit of a pause for thought. There are people in our near region who don't have access to the same amount of food that we have. Australian farmers, as world-class producers, export two-thirds of what we actually produce. We are great growers of food. We have the benefit of the technology, of the arable land and of the skills in our farming sector. Replacing or displacing that land use for another use—energy generation—needs to be done very seriously with great contemplation, with great respect to landowners, and also involving a mature debate with the Australian population. For those of us on this side of the House, we're up for the debate. We're up for the debate about nuclear, solar, wind, gas and also, where appropriate, prolonged use of some of those coal resources or alternative uses of some of those coal resources.</para>
<para>Now, the two newest power stations in the La Trobe Valley, Loy Yang A and Loy Yang B, were both slated to operate into the 2040s. They could operate safely and successfully in the 2040s in conjunction with more renewables. Gas is incredibly important to overcome the intermittency of solar and wind. Professor Arnold Dix, an expert in this field, commented to me the other day in relation to his desire to see high-speed rail in Australia, 'You don't have an electrified high-speed rail network and set the timetable based on whether the wind's blowing in Bass Strait. You need that reliable, affordable baseload energy source as well.' I continue to have an open mind on the nuclear debate because I believe that, if you are going to have a future made in Australia, as this bill proposes, you need to have a balanced approach to our future energy needs. Securing reliability and affordability and meeting our international targets are actually matters of national security. You have to be in a position to maintain your manufacturing sector with reliable and affordable energy, and I believe we should be taking advantage of a range of technologies to meet the challenge of supplying the energy Australia needs both today and into the future.</para>
<para>For people listening at home—all three of them!—energy security is about keeping the lights on. A country has to have the ability to keep the lights on. The country has to be able to run the public transport network, hospitals and universities, and ensure businesses and farmers can still produce their goods at a competitive price. All those things are needed in a modern and complex society like Australia. We can't do that with a 100 per cent weather-dependent system.</para>
<para>Time has escaped me, but I would make one final reference in relation to the bill regarding this Future Made in Australia and the ideological nature of the modern Labor Party. I can guarantee you that, on this Future made in Australia, when this cabinet is making decisions about what it will and won't support, the native hardwood timber industry will be ruled out. It's been ruled out of the National Reconstruction Fund. They'll rule it out because of their zealotry around trying to secure Greens preferences in the cities. I've already seen in my electorate what's happened since the hardwood timber industry has been run out of business by the state Labor government. When it comes to timber, you can use either your own wood or someone else's wood. Unfortunately, when it comes to the Australian Labor Party, they're quite happy to import timber from countries with poor environmental protocols. I encourage the modern Labor Party to re-establish its connections with blue-collar workers and stop selling out Australians for Greens preferences.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CONROY</name>
    <name.id>249127</name.id>
    <electorate>Shortland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's actually quite fortuitous to follow the member for Gippsland, who I will compliment: he has passion for his community. But, as a proud representative of the biggest power-generating region in the country, the mighty Hunter Valley and Lake Macquarie region, which produces 50 per cent more power than Gippsland, I would submit his understanding of energy policy is woefully out of date, does not reflect the current reality of economics or engineering and, quite frankly, is symptomatic of a coalition that, when in government, produced 23 energy policies and didn't land a single one of them. That is why so many manufacturing companies have been dealing with higher power prices than they needed to: the last government was incompetent about energy policy, and their incompetence continues in opposition with their mad nuclear folly, which I will refer to later in my speech. I didn't want to let the member for Gippsland's contribution go unanswered given he made claims to represent an energy region. I applaud the workers in Gippsland and their proud contribution to keeping the lights on, which is very important. Unfortunately, their federal representative doesn't understand energy policy. Having said that, I am pleased to make a contribution on the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 and the Future Made in Australia (Omnibus Amendments No. 1) Bill 2024.</para>
<para>A Future Made in Australia was one of the key policies Labor took to the 2022 election, which Australians voted in favour of, and I know it is going to deliver significant benefits to our country. The legislation includes three key components. It embeds the government's new National Interest Framework to help identify where Australia has a genuine comparative advantage in the net zero economy or where we have an economic security and resilience imperative. It establishes a robust sector assessment process to help improve understanding of how a government can best leverage private investment in areas of the economy aligned with the framework and help inform rigorous government decision-making. It defines a set of community benefit principles to ensure that the benefits of a future made in Australia support the private sector investment it enables to flow to local communities, workers and businesses.</para>
<para>In addition, the omnibus bill delivers on key parts of the plan that were announced in the 2024-25 budget. It enables Export Finance Australia to make domestically focused investments under the National Interest Account in alignment with the National Interest Framework. It safeguards the $6 billion in funding for ARENA's renewables and related priorities, giving industry and investors certainty to deliver sizeable, long-lasting projects. It sets up arrangements for the Future Made in Australia Innovation Fund to accelerate innovative technology and deployment in priority sectors and makes necessary adjustments to the governance arrangements of ARENA. I want to acknowledge the work of the Prime Minister, the Treasurer, and many of my ministerial colleagues who have contributed to this legislation.</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government believes that we need to make more things here in Australia. That's at the heart of our Future Made in Australia plan. Making more things here in our great nation and utilising our resources and skills means our economy will grow and new, well-paid jobs will be created. Making the most of the resources we have will spread opportunities right around our country, making Australia wealthier, more secure and more independent.</para>
<para>A Future Made in Australia is an economic plan for a better future. It will see us maximise the economic and industrial benefits of the global transformation to net zero and secure Australia's place in a changing global economic and strategic landscape. It will help Australia build a stronger, more diversified and more resilient economy powered by renewable energy. It will create secure, well-paid jobs, and encourage and facilitate the private sector investment required to make Australia an indispensable part of the global net zero economy. The plan builds on other significant measures the Albanese Labor government is delivering, including the National Reconstruction Fund, fee-free TAFE, our investments in defence, and our plan for cheaper, cleaner energy for all Australians.</para>
<para>The Hunter and Central Coast regions are well position to reap the benefits of a Future Made in Australia. We have a proud manufacturing history. My first electorate office in Cardiff bordered the Downer train yards, which manufactured trains and rolling stock for decades. Unfortunately, that work and the associated jobs were lost and sent overseas by previous New South Wales Liberal governments. There is still a Downer facility, but it is not as big as it could be if we had visionary state governments, which we now have.</para>
<para>Today, Cardiff is still a thriving manufacturing hub, ranging from defence industry businesses like 3ME Technology and Nupress to sustainable cosmetic manufacturer Imaginelle. Workers in the Shortland electorate have powered our nation for generations. I've spoken many times in this place about how grateful I am and continue to be for the sacrifices coalminers and energy workers have made and the economic prosperity their hard work has provided and continues to provide. I have also been upfront and honest about the fact that a lot of our power stations are reaching the end of their technical life. They were built in the sixties, seventies and eighties and are reaching the end of their natural life. The question is: what replaces them? The fact is that we need to capitalise on the opportunities presented by renewable energy, which is the cheapest replacement for those power stations when they reach their natural end of life.</para>
<para>We don't have time to waste. We need to act now so that we're not left behind, including the workers and communities of the Hunter and the Central Coast. The Albanese Labor government knows that. That's why, earlier this year, at the Liddell Power Station, we announced our $1 billion investment in the Solar Sunshot program. This will help ensure that more solar panels are made in Australia, including in the Hunter, creating jobs for generations of people in my community. It will create hundreds of new well-paid energy jobs in advanced manufacturing. In fact, there will be more jobs created as a result of this one announcement of one project than what existed at the former Liddell Power Station at its peak. That is what a future made in Australia is all about: making more things here and creating new secure, well-paid jobs.</para>
<para>I think it's important to contrast this investment and foresight with an example of what happens when you've got a government that doesn't have its act together and refuses to take advantage of the opportunities presented by renewable energy. About 90 per cent of the world's solar cells on people's roofs are based on technology developed out of the University of New South Wales, but how many manufacturing jobs have we got out of it? Zero. Why was that? Because we had a Liberal-National government led by John Howard with their heads in the sand who were happy to let these jobs and opportunities go overseas.</para>
<para>And clearly they haven't learned from their mistakes. Instead of seizing the opportunities of cleaner, cheaper renewable energy to power a new generation of secure, well-paid manufacturing jobs in places like the Hunter and the Central Coast, the opposition leader, the Liberals and the Nationals are going down the path of hugely expensive nuclear energy that won't be a reality for decades. The Leader of the Opposition's farcical nuclear policy will cost us billions of dollars and sacrifice the jobs, investment, energy and certainty that we need now. His policy is for hundreds of billions of dollars to be wasted on nuclear power stations that won't be built for decades and will only produce a fraction of the energy we need while driving off investment in other sectors.</para>
<para>If his plan ever comes to fruition, you will have two results. Firstly, we'll see nuclear power stations in the Hunter Valley and in Lake Macquarie that our community is dead opposed to. Let me repeat that: my community does not want nuclear power stations next to our kids' schools, next to playgrounds, next to sporting fields or next to aged-care homes. That is what the Leader of the Opposition is arguing for, and that is what every single Liberal Party member in this House is arguing for. My community doesn't want it, and my manufacturers and businesses don't want the massively increased electricity prices that would go with such a farcical plan. His plan is a recipe for manufacturing devastation, not revitalisation. Don't take my word for it; ask every independent economist, particularly specialists in the power sector. Nuclear energy is the most expensive form of energy around, and it's a recipe for deindustrialisation.</para>
<para>As the Minister for Defence Industry and Capability Delivery, it would be remiss of me not to take the opportunity to talk about what a future made in Australia means for our local defence industry. I'm proud to be the minister for defence industry, and I'm proud of the Australian defence industry that supports around 100,000 jobs—100,000 well-paid, high-skilled jobs that help provide national security for our nation. As I told the House last week, the government has increased the defence budget by $50 billion over the decade and $5.7 billion over the forward estimates, something those opposite are refusing to match. In fact, they're arguing for a $50 billion cut to the defence budget. That is their stated policy.</para>
<para>The government is accelerating the delivery of defence capability, which is having direct benefits for Australian industry compared to the so-called plans of the previous government. Under them, the first infantry fighting vehicle was to be delivered in 2029; under us, it will be in 2027 and made in Victoria. Under them, the first heavy landing craft was to be in 2035; under us, it will be in 2028 and made in Western Australia. Under them, manufacturing missiles, at best, was to start in 2035; under us, we start manufacturing missiles next year.</para>
<para>We're making record investments in the Australian defence industry. The last government only produced one thing in regard to the defence industry, and that was press releases. They had media statements, <inline font-style="italic">T</inline><inline font-style="italic">op Gun</inline> music and a red carpet, but they betrayed the Australian defence industry when they made $42 billion of spending commitments without adding a single cent to the defence budget, without rescoping any other programs and without changing the schedule of anything else. They perpetrated a fraud on the Australian people and the Australian defence industry. Just look at their most symbolic project: the construction of two supply vessels for the Royal Australian Navy. Under the Leader of the Opposition they were built overseas, not in Australia, and under the Leader of the Opposition they were not even able to provide safe drinking water for our sailors. Now we're fixing it, but that's the sort of support for the Australian defence industry that we see under the coalition.</para>
<para>In contrast, the Albanese government's focus on speed to capability will not only result in advanced equipment for the ADF being delivered sooner but will also create more high-skilled, well-paid jobs in the Australian defence industry. This approach is also opening up global opportunities for Australian industry. Under this government, we've negotiated the single largest defence export deal in our nation's history, to supply armoured vehicles made in Queensland to the German Army. This deal is worth over $1 billion and will secure more than 600 direct jobs in Queensland alone, with even more through the supply chain. Through stable leadership and unity of purpose, we are bringing capability forward while supporting a defence future made in Australia.</para>
<para>This debate really does reveal the choice the Australian people have at the election next year. You've got the vision of the Albanese Labor government—a vision to transform critical minerals, like lithium, to support solar panel manufacture in this country. We've been blessed with some of the greatest reserves of critical minerals, rare earths and other inputs into the net zero economy around the globe. The choice is simple: do we transform and value-add them here, or do we continue to be a farm and quarry in respect of those and send them offshore to be value-added in other countries and sent back here? That is the choice. We're all in favour of value-adding. We're all in favour of adding high-skilled, well-paid jobs that also contribute to national security and independence for this country, while those opposite are very content for that to be offshored—to be sent overseas.</para>
<para>That's not a surprise when you look at the appalling history of the coalition when in government. I was here—I was present—for what I believe was the greatest betrayal of the Australian manufacturing sector in the history of the nation. That was when the then Treasurer, Joe Hockey, goaded Holden to leave this country. Their election policy in 2013 was to cut $500 million from the very successful Automotive Transformation Scheme. They cut that $500 million. When they were told that that would lead to the devastation of the auto industry, did they change their policy? Did they resile from that future? No, they embraced it. I saw Joe Hockey stand in this exact spot and glory in telling Holden to leave the country—glory in consigning to the unemployment queue 200,000 workers, when you consider the direct and indirect employment. He gloried in the devastation that wreaked upon Elizabeth in South Australia and in Fishermans Bend in Melbourne. They gloried in destroying manufacturing jobs, and they'll do that again if their nuclear folly is allowed to actually be implemented.</para>
<para>By contrast, the Albanese Labor government believes strongly in a future made in Australia—a future where we value-add, a future where we grow the manufacturing sector, and a future where well-paid, high-skilled Australian manufacturing workers can plan a future, raise a family, buy a house and have a great future in this country. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WALLACE</name>
    <name.id>265967</name.id>
    <electorate>Fisher</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024. I only hope I've got some time to address some of the issues that the member for Shortland raised while on that absolute frolic, but I do want to get my speech out. I encourage him to listen on as he's driving home tonight.</para>
<para>I've worked really hard in Fisher to bring back small business and manufacturing since my election in 2016. I've championed local makers and creators through my #MadeInFisher and #SupportSunshineCoast campaigns. I've celebrated leading innovators and businesses through the Fisher Community Awards, and I've worked with local, national and global businesses to cultivate a defence industry on the Sunshine Coast. Unfortunately, the defence industry minister has just walked out the door. Eight years on, the Sunshine Coast is emerging as a high-tech, high-value manufacturing hub, contributing to crucial supply chains in defence, health, food and beverages. I want to take a moment to highlight them for their grit, determination and ingenuity. We've got craft brewers like Your Mates Brewing in Warana, Brouhaha in Baringa and Moffat Beach Brewing in Caloundra. We've got distillers like Stillmaker and Sons in Montville, Beachtree Gin in Caloundra and the brand-new Rare Orchid Distilling in Landsborough. Unfortunately, I don't drink so I can't partake in any of those goods.</para>
<para>We've got other companies like GreaseBoss, who are absolutely transforming the way that large-scale mining and manufacturing equipment is greased—it's very important to have regular greasing. We've also got HeliMods, run by Will Shrapnel, which is a great local business in Caloundra. They do some fantastic work with their mission config systems turning helicopters into mobile intensive care ambulances. They are doing that around the world, and they are based in Caloundra. They're also playing a vital role in the former coalition government's Ghost Bat program. Eniquest is another local manufacturer in my electorate. They create diesel generators for our Australian and New Zealand armies and provide auxiliary power units to forward operating bases, to Bushmaster vehicles and to Hawkei vehicles. A big shout-out to Don Pulver and his team for the great work that they do there.</para>
<para>Leakster is using AI to monitor and condition water assets. I see the member for Blair has walked into the chamber. While Kilcoy Global's abattoir might be in his electorate, the head office is in mine. Kilcoy Global is a tremendous business, employing thousands of people around the country, and they've just gone and built a very extensive food manufacturing facility where they manufacture and package food up. If you're like me and you keep some of those meals in the freezer or your fridge at home for when you don't have time to cook something and you can whack it in the microwave, chances are they've come from Kilcoy Global. It's a great local business, and I'm going to claim them, member for Blair, as being a Sunshine Coast business rather than a Blair based business. It's just the abattoir in Blair, but the brains of the operation and the manufacturing plant are in Caloundra.</para>
<para>King Truss is creating building and hardware supplies, and is a great local truss and wall manufacturer. I've been out to visit the team there. First Light Fabrication is creating and fabricating marine equipment. Nybro is manufacturing disability-accessible vehicle modifications. In fact, a big shout-out to the Nybro team, who did the modifications to my own daughter Sarah's car. Wherever you turn, from the shores of Alexandra Headland to the foothills of Mount Mellum, you'll find Fisher manufacturers, primary producers and creators putting the Sunshine Coast on the map.</para>
<para>It's for those local manufacturers and small businesses that I stand today in opposition to this bill. The more we learn about this bill, the more we see the blatant truth, which is that this Labor government has no plan for our economy, nor do they have a plan for our manufacturers or for sovereign capability. This legislation is nothing more than plain, old-fashioned pork-barrelling. It's a framework for big government and big bureaucracy. It's a proposal to increase the cost of doing business with Labor's big, red stamp of approval.</para>
<para>This is another instance of this Labor government trying to spin their way out of trouble. It's a bill which demands that Australian families and their businesses look past the last two years of absolute chaos and trust Labor to make the right calls. That's what they're asking. They say, 'Don't worry about what's happened over the last two years. Trust us. We'll get it right.' Well, last time a government said, 'Trust us', I think most Australians would say, 'No, thank you.' After a litany of broken promises and a catalogue of crises, one thing is absolutely crystal clear: Australians do not trust this Prime Minister or this government to do the right thing.</para>
<para>The bill provides for a national interest framework, which would consider where government investment—that is, taxpayers' money—should go, based on a very narrow set of criteria. It expands the remit of Export Finance Australia and the Australian Renewable Energy Agency to fund domestic industries. Worse still, it puts the Treasurer and the Minister for Finance in charge of decision-making. Let me put this very simply: these laws will give the Treasurer the power to decide where to spend Australians' money. It is a slush fund, plain and simple, with nearly $4 billion in its coffers. This is the same Treasurer and the same government which have directed $13.7 billion and more into green energy pipedreams while ignoring the rising cost of energy, water and utilities. They poured millions of dollars into the Environmental Defenders Office, funding lawyers to sue the government. Green corporate welfare, green tape and overregulation, investing in fanciful projects, which the market is now abandoning, because it makes for a good social media post—all of this is paid for by taxpayers, who are now paying 21 per cent more in their electricity prices. They are now paying 22 per cent more in their gas prices.</para>
<para>Members of the government are living with their heads in the clouds if they think that Australian manufacturers are going to be able to be competitive with other countries around the world whilst this government continues to drive up energy prices with the member for McMahon's wild and crazy ideas. You know, when I was a kid, Deputy Speaker Vasta—and you'd appreciate this; I believe you used to play soccer as a kid. When you're playing soccer and you're on the sporting field, and the opposition is giving you a hard time, what did we used to say if we were up? We'd point to the scoreboard and say, 'Scoreboard, old son; scoreboard.' Well, scoreboard. Look at what's happening to this country. Look at the cost of living. Look at what is happening in no small part because of the government's policies in relation to energy. How in God's name does this government think that our manufacturers are going to compete?</para>
<para>I spoke about all those companies earlier. I constantly get manufacturers saying to me: 'Andrew, I'm just having so much trouble. I am having so much trouble keeping my head above water because of the costs.' You think the costs of running a household have gone sky high? You ought to try the costs of being a manufacturer in Australia right now. And why is that? When you make things, you need to use energy. Let me say that again for those members opposite who may not understand. When you make things, you have to use energy, and that energy has to come from somewhere.</para>
<para>With the folly of this government's rise and rise and push for—what is it—83 per cent renewables in such a short timeframe, our industries, our manufacturers are saying: 'Well, I might as well shut up shop, because I can't do what I have been used to doing and provide it for a similar price. I've got to either increase my prices significantly or stop doing what I'm doing.' That is to the eternal shame of this government.</para>
<para>My side of politics has been derided for this for some time by the Greens and by Labor, but do you know what? It is a truism. You can't run manufacturing with solar panels and wind turbines when the sun is not shining and the wind is not blowing. Even if you have very significant batteries, the sort of industries that manufacturers are trying to run—you try running a steel smelter or an aluminium smelter on renewables or batteries. At the moment, it can't be done. It cannot be done. Wouldn't it be nice? Yes, it'd be nice. It'd be nice if I drove a Maserati, but the reality is that the technology is not there.</para>
<para>The member for Shortland had the audacity to talk about deindustrialisation. This government is doing its level best to deindustrialise this country. It beggars belief that those members opposite still want to talk about the car manufacturing industry when this government is driving local manufacturing into the ground.</para>
<para>The member for Shortland also talked up a big game about defence manufacturing. I'm sure I'm not the only person to say this to the member for Shortland, who's probably on his way home now: local defence manufacturers, member for Shortland, are not happy with you. Every defence industry contractor that I talk to that is based in Australia says the same thing to me, and that is that defence contracting in Australia has stopped dead. It has stopped dead because this government was so immersed in things like the Voice referendum. It was so immersed in doing review after review after review that the money stopped for defence contractors. A lot of these small defence contractors—it's axiomatic—were small businesses. When you choke a small business of cash flow, what happens? The small business dies. It withers on the grapevine. So for the member for Shortland to come in here and start spruiking defence industry manufacturing is patently wrong.</para>
<para>I don't think I have spoken to an Australian defence industry contractor who is singing happy days right now. They are bleeding. They are haemorrhaging money. Some of those businesses, as I indicated, are in my electorate, but it's not just those in my electorate. It is right across this country. It's because of the indecisiveness. It's because power prices are so damn high in this country right now and because this government seems to just do nothing in relation to defence industry that these poor beggars are now having to lay people off. What really concerns me is that they will have lost faith in the Australian government. Whether it's Labor or the conservatives, they will have lost faith in us. But I want to assure them: hang tough. Hang in there till the next election, because hopefully we will retake the reins again and we will restore it.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WOOD</name>
    <name.id>E0F</name.id>
    <electorate>La Trobe</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I congratulate Rob Sitch, who just won another Logie Award for best comedy with <inline font-style="italic">Utopia</inline>. When it comes to the name of this bill, the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024, it would just be one that they chose in <inline font-style="italic">Utopia</inline>. It's just a classic. It's got the right name. The public will like the term. The government would love using the term. When all the members send out their emails and make their speeches, it's just such a great name. When you see the final document, it'll be the right weight and the right texture when it comes to the paper; it'll have the correct font. It's such a perfect document. The problem is, though, when it comes to Labor and their commitments to big projects like this, it is a lot of money, and I am greatly concerned by the way it will be delivered.</para>
<para>I will go back a bit in time to when we had Labor's pink batts insulation plan. It seemed like a great idea at the time. They wanted houses right around Australia to have better insulation. I think in total they insulated 1.1 million homes, and the payment to make this happen was $1.4 billion. Sadly, it actually led to the Royal Commission into the Home Insulation Program it was so bad. It followed the deaths of four workers, aged 16 to 25, who died in separate incidents that may have been attributed to the failure to identify and manage workplace health and safety. It was an absolute tragedy. At the time, when the Labor government proposed this, it sounded absolutely great.</para>
<para>We also already have commercialisation grants. This is so important when it comes to new businesses. To be honest, I've always been firm that if you have an existing business that's gone for a number of years that should be supported with commercialisation grants. Then you have research and development export grants. If someone is doing their research in Australia on new products, when they export those, they get a tax rebate on those.</para>
<para>In the south-east of Melbourne, in my electorate of La Trobe, we're looking at building what is called meta city, which will be home to an industrial park and high-tech area. I am going to talk about Labor when it comes to some of the road projects around that area and the way they have been managed by the state government. Just nearby, we have Dandenong, which is in the seat of Holt, next door to La Trobe. It is probably the biggest manufacturing hub in Australia. For those who don't know, the industrial sector in Victoria contributes around $30 billion to the state's economy each year, which is 27 per cent of the nation's manufacturing output, which is quite incredible. Our manufacturing businesses transform a range of materials and new products that cover food, beverages, petroleum, coal, paper, machinery, metals, furniture, clothes, textiles, pharmaceuticals, planes and boats.</para>
<para>The great concern that I have about this government proposal is this. You have those smaller businesses, family businesses, doing well, and they will be competing with major corporations. We can look at it as a $15 billion slush fund when it comes to corporate giants in Australia who may be listed companies and yet be receiving potentially billions of dollars. Rather than the small mum-and-dad businesses, it is going to go to the big multinationals, even when it comes to critical minerals and hydrogen projects. I don't know why the government would want to help those huge organisations when they come into Australia.</para>
<para>I mentioned that locally we have meta city, which is a proposal to have a very high-tech, industrial area. When it comes to Labor at the state level managing projects, I will give you some costings. Back in 2007—obviously it was a number of years ago—in the electorate of La Trobe we committed $10 million to the Bryn Mawr bridge. That goes over the packing train line. Labor came out at the time and committed, I think, $30 million. It was 2004. It was built in 2007. It was actually built by Casey council for less than $10 million. Then we come to the Clyde Road, which is right beside this meta city I was talking about before. The cost when we were looking at this in 2007 was going to be in the vicinity of $30 million, and then it grew to $80 million. We got the project manager who built the Bryn Mawr Bridge in Beaconsfield down, and we said: 'How much do you think this project would cost? It's a grade separation going over Clyde Road, and it's going to be really important for our industrial area. We've got Enterprise Avenue, which has a number of high-tech businesses in that area.' And they said, 'You can get change from $30 million.' We said, 'But it has actually been quoted now as an $80 million project.' The project manager for Bryn Mawr Bridge said: 'That's just the unions. That's what happens when it comes to the CFMEU.'</para>
<para>So then we go further in time, to when we committed to funding for the project to be built. This is, again, in Casey. The Casey council is a large council and has a big team of engineers. When they put the quotes forward again, it was going to be a $70 million project. The road was going over the Monash Freeway, just a duplication going to the grade separation, and the council cost was $70 million. Under state Labor, where the CFMEU tax and all of the union fees got involved, it became a $250 million project, so, basically, every meter of road cost $250,000.</para>
<para>I haven't got much hope when it comes to Labor and when it comes to them managing a $30 billion so-called 'build in Australia' when we can't even get roads built in a manner which would be cost-effective. Again locally, you think about all the workers going from Berwick train station down to Dandenong. We've talked about that huge manufacturing hub. We committed $15 million to build the train station. The city council in Mitcham built a 400-spot carpark. When it came to Berwick, the cost blew out to $64 million, an incredible amount of money. When it comes to the CFMEU tax, the same thing happened with Pakenham Road, Racecourse Road and McGregor Road. They were $80 million and they blew out to $398 million, and the CFMEU flags were out.</para>
<para>The great concern I have when it comes to this bill and this proposal is: who are going to be the winners? How are the unions going to get involved? Again, we've seen this sort of fake uproar about the CFMEU with the Labor Party now saying: 'Oh, gee, they've been really bad. We didn't know about the bikies and everything.' Everyone knew the bikies were involved in the CFMEU. It came out on <inline font-style="italic">60 Minutes</inline>, and I want to give credit to Nick McKenzie and the <inline font-style="italic">Age</inline> for highlighting the corruption and the intimidation.</para>
<para>How is the government going to ensure that this huge injection of money does not go to those who are leftover from the CFMEU, as they go elsewhere, and to the bikies? How is the money going to be managed without ripping off the taxpayer? It's a huge wad of money, and I believe that the Treasurer has some discretionary spending—billions of dollars, I think. Where is that going to be spent? Is this to appease the teals and make sure they get preference deals to keep them in government? It seems to me to be completely unfair and unnecessary.</para>
<para>In fact, I'm all for renewable energy when it comes to solar and wind. But the thing is, when it comes to Labor's renewables-only proposal, in parts of my electorate, in areas such as Emerald, Cockatoo and Gembrook, we are always having power outages. Back in June 2021, I think the power was out for six or seven weeks. There's no electricity and no mains power there. In winter, there's no solar. There is no area in the place that I'm talking about where you can actually have wind as a meaningful form of energy.</para>
<para>The government's 82 per cent renewable target by 2030 requires 4.5 gigawatts of additional large-scale wind and solar every year. Less than one-third of this will be delivered. It's going to take 58 million solar panels and also 3,500 wind turbines and up to 28,000 kilometres of new transmission lines across the country.</para>
<para>I then come to the point which I've always been concerned about: why won't the government even consider nuclear energy? I must admit that in days gone by I was concerned about the use of nuclear energy and about disposal. But in Australia we have the uranium-mining sector and we export uranium around the world. Look at all these OECD countries—places like Canada and France. Even the new Prime Minister of the UK is espousing nuclear power and saying how important it is to have it in the mix. The Labor government will not even consider it. I don't know why you wouldn't even consider having nuclear power as an option. Rather than just saying, 'Yes, let's just do some research and look at it,' they've completely walked away from that idea.</para>
<para>Another aspect of this bill is the cost of living. Australians are really hurting. In my electorate, people are really hurting when it comes to their power bills and their insurance, both of which have gone up, and when it comes to issues such as rentals. When I went down to Casey Hospital and met the nurses there, who are doing a fantastic job, the biggest issue for international nurses was actually finding accommodation. So things have become a lot tougher, not only for people in my electorate and right across the country but also for businesses, which are really hurting. Every time I go and speak to a cafe owner, I find that they're really hurting.</para>
<para>Then we have this Future Made in Australia Bill, which provides billions and billions of dollars in corporate welfare for some of Australia's wealthiest companies and individuals. I know that is not the best way to help mums and dads and singles and students, who are trying to stay at home and get by and are hearing about the amazing amount of money being spent by Labor on a folly to hopefully make sure they deliver something. I believe that in their own minds their intentions are good, but the danger is that this is so much money. It's just going to hurt so many people. We saw what happened with pink batts in the past, and we also remember what happened when Labor tried to have their Fuelwatch and GroceryWatch. We're going to have this amazing amount of money spent, and who are going to be the beneficiaries of this? As I said, I just can't see it being the mums and dads of Australia.</para>
<para>I just finish on this point: the government really should be looking after small business. In Victoria, small businesses are really hurting as a result of the Victorian Labor state government and the land tax. The land tax is killing small businesses. It's killing those mums and dads who have invested in an investment property. Thirty per cent of houses now sold in Victoria are actually being sold by landlords.</para>
<para>So I have grave concerns about the way this massive amount of money will be spent. It won't help mums and dads and singles in Australia.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LEESER</name>
    <name.id>109556</name.id>
    <electorate>Berowra</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The bill that we have before us tonight, the Future Made in Australia Bill 2024, is, in short, a microcosm of everything that is wrong with Labor's economic policy—a range of bad ideas that have been tried in the past and proved to have failed, yet they're trying them again. We see it in the way which Labor is dealing with the cost-of-living crisis. Orthodox economic policy is that, when inflation is going up and up, you reduce government spending to take pressure off inflation. When we have a productivity crisis, orthodox economic policy says that you liberate the labour market, create greater flexibility and allow employers and employees to work the hours they want or need, to get productivity going and get the flexibility that you need to create more jobs. An orthodox economic policy says that you let markets decide what industries exist in a particular country, and when governments pick winners, you end up with bad results. Yet, here in this bill, we have tried, tested and failed policy being recycled again in this so-called Made in Australia bill. This bill takes that iconic idea of Australian made, with its beautiful—</para>
<para>Debate interrupted.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>ADJOURNMENT</title>
        <page.no>103</page.no>
        <type>ADJOURNMENT</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fishing Industry</title>
          <page.no>103</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RICK WILSON</name>
    <name.id>198084</name.id>
    <electorate>O'Connor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise this evening to support the recreational and commercial fishers of my electorate, whose lifestyles and livelihoods are being threatened by state Labor's plans to lock up fisheries along 1,200 kilometres of WA's south coast. From Eucla in the east to Nannup in the west, O'Connor spans almost all of WA's extensive shoreline.</para>
<para>Earlier this month, I caught up with the south coast angler and former CEO of the WA Fishing Industry Council, Darryl Hockey, to discuss the state's plan to ban fishing from vast tracts of the Southern Ocean. The so-called South Coast Marine Park would extend west from the state border, through Esperance, to Bremer Bay. Mr Hockey confirmed what I'd been hearing across my electorate, that the WA government has failed to undertake a triple-bottom-line analysis of its planned marine park.</para>
<para>The benefits to the environment of bluntly locking up productive fisheries and throwing away the key are questionable enough. But where Labor's fishery exclusion zones fall incredibly short is in the scant analysis of the social and economic havoc the marine park would wreak. Breathtakingly beautiful Esperance is the largest town in the marine park area. People there are absolutely outraged, with thousands rolling up to rallies opposing the widespread fishing bans.</para>
<para>Esperance is a recreational and commercial fishing town. Every summer, families from Kalgoorlie, Kambalda, Norseman and other remote communities across the Goldfields travel down to Esperance for their annual holiday by the sea. This is a very big deal for many O'Connor people who live hundreds of kilometres from the coast, and most families who visit Esperance during their summer break like to fish.</para>
<para>The people of O'Connor, which has one of the longest coastlines of any electorate, also support their state's fishing industry, choosing to eat locally caught fish whenever they can. Unfortunately, across Australia, a nation girt by sea, 70 per cent of the seafood we consume is now imported. If WA Labor and its Greens cheer squad succeed in imposing the marine park, the likelihood of Western Australians ever getting to eat Western Australian seafood will be severely diminished.</para>
<para>During my meeting with Mr Hockey, the point was made that, if WA fishers can't fish locally, we'll be left to import inferior products from unsustainable fisheries overseas. We agreed that the marine park is the antithesis of sustainable resource management. There is no balance, and it would be a disaster for coastal economies and their communities. It would erode WA's food security and harm the state's fishing and tourism industries.</para>
<para>The state environment minister, Reece Whitby, has snatched control of the marine park process, leaving WA's primary industries department, and hence south coast fishers, out in the cold. In May, I wrote to tell Mr Whitby that nine out of 10 respondents to a survey I ran opposed his marine park. Almost 6,000 people took the time to respond to my survey. Mr Whitby did not take the time to respond to my letter until today—a lazy three-month turnaround. In a sanctimonious twist, his letter accuses me of not advocating for south coast communities. Mr Whitby then slams my opposition to his marine park: 'This is an arrogant environment minister who is not listening to the people. He is now weighing up whether to unilaterally impose his divisive fishing ban before the next state election in March. With no decent analysis undertaken on the impact of the south coast economy or lifestyle, it would be a reckless minister, indeed, who goes to the polls with this half-baked plan.'</para>
<para>I make no apology for challenging Mr Whitby's convoluted and seemingly pre-ordained planning process on behalf of my constituents. Instead, I will keep fighting this unfair fishing ban. Like federal Labor's ban on live sheep exports, state Labor's broad-scale fishing industry ban is intensely unpopular with south coast locals. Both bans attack regional communities, and both bans shift the market for the primary produce offshore to less sustainable producers, to the detriment of Australian farmers and fishers who operate to higher standards.</para>
<para>As the next phase of my fight to scupper the South Coast Marine Park, I'm launching a petition. I'll do this online and in hard copy so that I can submit the petition to the WA Legislative Council for consideration by the Standing Committee on Environment and Public Affairs. I'll continue to keep the people of O'Connor informed of the progress in a simpler, more transparent way than Mr Whitby ever has, because plans such as the South Coast Marine Park are only as good as the buy-in they have from the public. All the evidence to date indicates there is no buy-in here.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bean Electorate: Community Services, Jack, Ms Maeve</title>
          <page.no>104</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DAVID SMITH</name>
    <name.id>276714</name.id>
    <electorate>Bean</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Volunteers are the backbone of all the communities represented here in this place. They keep our community organisations running, our sporting clubs functional, our museums and attractions open and our most vulnerable cared for. One of the most inspiring parts of my time as a member of this place has been to see the enormous and impactful work that is done across my electorate of Bean by volunteers from all walks of life. Nearly every year, I have the privilege to represent the people of Bean in this place. There has been a round of grants targeted at community volunteers. The volunteer grants, offered through the Department of Social Services, offer assistance of up to $5,000 to eligible groups for practical assistance to further enable their good work. I've been able to assist many groups across the electorate to access these grants.</para>
<para>I would like to take a moment to acknowledge some recent recipients and celebrate the great work they do for our community: the ACT Careers Association, who promote career development opportunities across the ACT; the Australia Nepal Friendship Society, who just recently had their 30th birthday and who aim to celebrate Nepali heritage in Australia and the friendship between the two nations; the Australian Breastfeeding Association of Canberra, who will use the grant to fund education, including through offering Certificate IV in Breastfeeding Education to their volunteers; Bosom Buddies ACT, who provide services to Canberrans dealing with breast cancer; Gilmore Church, a Pentecostal community who serve the Tuggeranong area, working closely with our First Nations communities; Good Shepherd Community Church, who act out their faith through community service, maintaining foodbanks and running a weekly dinner service that combines fellowship focused worship with a warm meal; Menslink, who provide and deliver mentoring and peer support for young men in Bean and across Canberra; the Multicultural Association of Canberra, who promote understanding and appreciation of diverse cultures across the ACT community; the Namadgi School P&C, who facilitate, like so many P&Cs, parent participation at the school and promote engagement throughout the school community.</para>
<para>I would also like to acknowledge: Parentline ACT, who support parents across Canberra and provide free and confidential counselling services to parents and carers, along with parenting courses and many other resources; the Perinatal Wellbeing Centre, who provide holistic and mental health support to over 300 local families at vital times in their lives; the Tidbinbilla Pioneers Association, who do an extraordinary job preserving and sharing the stories of the settlers of the beautiful Tidbinbilla valley, in my electorate; the Weston Creek Men's Shed, who support the mental and physical wellbeing of men in Weston Creek, highlighting the importance of community and mateship here in Canberra, and who particularly supported sheds that were recovering on the South Coast after the bushfires; and the Yeddung Mura Aboriginal Corporation, who do important work supporting people recently released from prison as they reintegrate into their communities.</para>
<para>I'd also like to acknowledge our great southside sports clubs who also received grant funding: the ACT Eagles Baseball Club, the Torrens Tennis Club, the Tuggeranong Valley Australian Football Netball Club, the Tuggeranong Bushrangers Rugby League Football Club, the Weston Creek Molonglo Cricket Club, Pickleball ACT—who are doing great work promoting one of the fastest growing sports in the Canberra region, which I'm almost capable of playing effectively—and the Xtreme Stars dance troupe.</para>
<para>I would like to close by recognising the dedication and ongoing hard work of the Minister for Social Services, the member for Kingston. I know how committed she is to supporting the work of volunteers, and I would like to thank her for that support.</para>
<para>Briefly, before I sit, I'd like to take some time to recognise Maeve Jack, who started in my office 12 months ago and had her final day today. Maeve's dream wasn't to work in my office, even though that's hard to believe! Her dream was to work in curatorial services. She is going to a much better place and commences work with AIATSIS on Monday next week.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Menzies Electorate: Public Speaking</title>
          <page.no>105</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WOLAHAN</name>
    <name.id>235654</name.id>
    <electorate>Menzies</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak about the topic of public speaking—the power and joy of public speaking. The reason I do so is there was a competition in my electorate that was broken up into component parts in schools, and I was a judge in one of the schools in Beverley Hills Primary School. There, 20-plus students got up and delivered a speech without notes in front of judges, parents and peers. Many of those students were migrants to Australia who didn't have English as their first language. I want to speak to them, and I'm speaking from a place that has some extraordinary speaking talent and has seen some extraordinary speakers, from presidents to our prime ministers to visiting prime ministers, to very moving speeches in this place. This is not only the great hall of our democracy but it is also where the spoken word gets broadcast throughout our nation, particularly through the camera. I thank the Rotary Club of Mont Albert and Surrey Hills for organising this competition. Their current co-presidents are Rob Teese and Nigel Cooper.</para>
<para>When I was younger, I had a slight stutter, and my grandad encouraged me to stand up and speak more often. I'm very grateful to him for encouraging me to do that. I remember my very first speech in primary school—at a similar age to the students I was judging. I was giving a speech to thank the lollipop lady, who was retiring after 40 years. I thought I told a very funny joke when I said, 'After 40 years, she finally had it licked.' The laughter was a bit louder than what I've just received here, so thank you for that. It ignited an interest and a passion in speaking that, in part, has taken me to this place. To those students who had the courage to put their hands up in that competition, I say, 'Well done and keep it up.' In this evolving world, we don't know what the future jobs will be for you, but what we do know is that the power of speaking will be key to success in all of them, whether you are a nurse or a doctor giving comfort to a patient, or telling a parent that their child is ill; whether you are a teacher or a principal giving feedback to your class and inspiring them to push themselves to the next level, or even to enter a public speaking competition; whether you are a parent giving comfort to your child—like we saw in the Olympics, when that diver didn't achieve the results she wanted but her dad stood there and told her how proud he was of her and how proud her country was of her, and it was captured on camera.</para>
<para>Public speaking is often declaring your love for someone, declaring you're sorry for something that you did in front of others. It can be before a small crowd or a large crowd, but it is something we can all get better at with practice. Of course, there's a fear with public speaking. Everyone has it, that feeling of fight or flight; our heart-rates increase, our mouths get dry, and we would rather be anywhere else than where we are now. What we know, particularly in this place, is that you can overcome that fear with practice. For those who are starting out on their public-speaking journey, you're already good at it. Anyone who can tell a story is a good public speaker. If you are looking for an example to take to practise the craft, stand up in front of your class and tell a story. Tell a personal story about yourself. It has once been said that if you speak from the heart, you will connect to the heart. Learn to pause. When we pause, people digest what we've just said, and it also allows you the chance to think of what you will do next. Often, you'll speak without notes—and in this place, lots of us speak without notes whenever we can—but that comes with preparation for what we want to say. If people have turned up to listen to you, you owe them saying something that is worth listening to, and that comes with preparing. Then watch—watch others, watch what they do and, finally, watch yourself. It's often when we watch a video of ourselves that we'll self-correct.</para>
<para>To Beverley Hills Primary School and to every school that entered this competition, congratulations. Keep it up—I know that is a skill that will set your life up for success in the future.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Werriwa Electorate</title>
          <page.no>105</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STANLEY</name>
    <name.id>265990</name.id>
    <electorate>Werriwa</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We all live in a community of one sort or another, but our communities are far more complex than a collection of homes and streets. The real essence of a community consists of the areas of common interest, of which the physical location where we actually live is probably the least important.</para>
<para>The great American novelist and author of <inline font-style="italic">Moby Dick</inline>, Herman Melville noted the following:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We cannot live only for ourselves. A thousand fibres connect us with our fellow men.</para></quote>
<para>So true, because there are indeed thousands of fibres that connect us all and help constitute a modern community.</para>
<para>One very strong connective fibre in the area of common interest that brings people together in the electorate of Werriwa is faith. Faith in my electorate is expressed in many and varied ways. For the Mandaean community it's expressed around water and baptism in the Georges River. For our Islamic community, events such as Ramadan and Eid are particularly significant, as the many mosques in my electorate fill with prayers. In this respect I was most pleased to attend the Ramadan Eid Bazaar at the Whitlam Centre in April and iftars held by Al Amanah College. For the Syriac community, the recent blessing of the foundation stone for a new parish and pastoral centre in Kemps Creek. In relation to my Buddhist community, I'm always delighted to attend the Lunar New Year blessing and the upcoming Moon Festival. At Diwali my Hindu community lights the streets to the joy of everyone, and we are now looking forward to the upcoming celebration or Lord Ganeshotsav. And of course, we have Christmas and Easter, which are celebrated by the Christians in my electorate.</para>
<para>These observations are by no means exhaustive, but they are a snapshot of the diversity of our community. Our community is cohesive, and it's important to emphasise there is real acceptance and acknowledgement that all faiths have a place and need to be respected.</para>
<para>If religion is one fibre that connects the electorate and makes the wonderful community what it is, what are the others? Schools and education rank highly. An event I attended this year was the 40th anniversary celebration of the William Carey Christian School. Other have included International Women's Day at Hoxton Park High School and my visit to Unity Grammar to celebrate their new STEM building.</para>
<para>Any visit to the sidelines of a sporting fixture or a match on a Saturday or Sunday will show another place where communities are formed. From my days of refereeing junior rugby league, I've known the unique place that sport, and particularly junior sport, plays in forming communities and building resilience. Be it helping on the day doing line-marking, serving in the canteen or simply cheering from the sidelines, sport is uniquely placed in my electorate to help grow a sense of belonging and cohesion.</para>
<para>It was wonderful to be at Liverpool Olympic and see them host a tournament under the banner of the Snaparoos for players of all ages and disabilities. The event was supported by the Southern Districts Football Association, and I was privileged to catch up with Catherine Cannuli, Andy Favaloro and the CEO of the Marconi Club.</para>
<para>On top of these fibres of faith, education and sport, there are also layers of general community and cultural events that foster a sense of belonging and social cohesion in our electorate. The list of events I've attended in recent months is too long for me to go into in detail but I will make mention of the Serbian Folkloric Festival, Pakistan Mango and Cultural Festival and the 53rd Annual Mass and Communion Luncheon for the Liverpool Catholic Club. Each of these events are examples of the fibre that Herman Melville referred to.</para>
<para>There is one final event that I would like to mention tonight and that is particularly important for social cohesion in my community, which is National Sorry Day. In May, I attended Liverpool Council's Sorry Day commemoration. It is a time to reflect on the injustices endured by our Aboriginal Australians, to say sorry and to commit ourselves to doing better. The need for Sorry Day is more important than ever. Complete social cohesion will only be achieved when real reconciliation takes place.</para>
<para>My electorate is not immune to pressures, but the threads that unite it—faith, education, sport and cultural diversity—do so in a manner that make for a wonderful community and I am so proud to be their representative in this place.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Longman Electorate: Meals on Wheels</title>
          <page.no>106</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr YOUNG</name>
    <name.id>201906</name.id>
    <electorate>Longman</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Meals on Wheels runs six centres in Moreton Bay, four of which are in my electorate of Longman, situated in Burpengary, Woodford, Caboolture and Bribie Island. This trusted organisation receives government funding at both the state and the federal level. The Queensland state government provides a flat rate of funding of $42,000 per annum, which works out at $5.79 per meal—which obviously decreases per meal as their client base expands—and the federal government provides funding of $10.77 per meal. To give an idea of the enormity of the work Meals on Wheels do in the Moreton Bay region, they provided 124,009 meals in the 2023-24 year. That's around 476 meals per day, and the demand keeps growing. Unfortunately, the state and federal government funding only covered the cost of 115,376 meals, which meant that extra funding for almost 9,000 meals had to be found.</para>
<para>But the question is: how do Meals on Wheels fund these extra meals that they provide? I'm glad you asked, Speaker! First, they do outside catering, which they managed to double last financial year, and they also receive donations. Their hardworking and diligent staff often donate many hours at no cost, and their dedicated general manager, Wendy Smith, does her best to control costs—costs that, like those of every other household, business and organisation around the country, have skyrocketed under the current government. Money simply isn't going as far as it used to. Employee costs have risen by $180,000 in the past 12 months, water costs have doubled, and electricity costs have risen by over 75 per cent, or $24,000 in real terms. In the interests of fairness, I want to acknowledge that federal funding has increased as well in that period, but simply not by enough. The raw costs of the produce have increased from $658,102 to $823,386. The bottom line is that the small increase in funding is simply well short of covering the massive increase in costs.</para>
<para>What does this mean practically? Well, it means that tough decisions have to be made so that this wonderful, well-respected community organisation will continue to provide its much-needed services to so many in the community of Longman. I'm sad to report that three staff will lose their jobs this week. Recipients will incur a 50c increase in meals. With the average customer receiving five meals per week, this will add another $130 per year to their budget this year. Worse still, if they can't afford that, they will simply have to skip meals and at times go hungry. From September, Meals on Wheels will no longer be operating on Mondays in Moreton Bay. That's right: they're closing every Monday.</para>
<para>What is the latest federal and state government response to this dilemma? Meals on Wheels received the news that, as of 1 August, funding was frozen and they would no longer receive additional federal funding for any new clients, in a cost-of-living crisis. Go figure! I spoke to Wendy, and she said they received requests from 47 new clients for meals in just the first two days of this month. Under this Labor government's decision to freeze funding for meals, these people will be given the news that Meals on Wheels can't help them. Where do these clients come from? Many are referred to Meals on Wheels by aged-care workers. Many are referred from hospital when they are discharged. So this most vulnerable cohort are being neglected due to this decision to freeze Meals on Wheels funding. It's a disgrace in a cost-of-living crisis.</para>
<para>So what are the solutions? First, Meals on Wheels need both state and federal governments to increase funding to at least cover the crazy homegrown inflation we have endured over the past two years and the increased demand due to more people experiencing harder times. Meals on Wheels are doing their part and trying to save costs as well. Their solution, which I fully support, is to build one megakitchen that will do the cooking for all six centres in the Moreton Bay region I've mentioned, as well as some of the centres on the Sunshine Coast. In effect, this one kitchen would do the meals for at least 10 centres, and the existing centres would become distribution points only, not meal preparation facilities. This means having to pay the costs for running, maintaining and powering one kitchen, not 10. It makes great economic sense, and I commend Wendy for her vision on how to supply more of these much-needed, lower-cost, nutritious meals.</para>
<para>It's not only the physical support that Meals on Wheels offers. For many recipients, the friendly Meals on Wheels volunteer delivery driver is the only person they may have contact with, and we must at all costs ensure this vital service continues.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Reid Electorate: Infrastructure</title>
          <page.no>107</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SITOU</name>
    <name.id>298121</name.id>
    <electorate>Reid</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My electorate of Reid is home to some amazing things: great food, culture, wonderful parks and a great diverse community. But, unfortunately, Reid is also home to Australia's worst roundabout. Residents in the suburbs of Homebush, North Strathfield, Concord, Rhodes, Sydney Olympic Park, Newington and Wentworth Point have suffered for years and years having to contend with traffic to contend with traffic congestion at the DFO roundabout.</para>
<para>The traffic is terrible on weekends, during peak hours and around major sporting events, making it disruptive and unsafe for residents, and my colleague the Member for Werriwa says that she avoids it entirely. For years, previous governments have been talking about fixing this traffic mayhem, making election commitment after election commitment but never delivering. And residents have been patiently waiting for a solution.</para>
<para>When Transport for NSW finally landed on a preferred option, it was estimated to cost $100 million but had no timeline or indication of the level of disruption to the community. Since I was elected in 2022, I have met many times with Transport for NSW to try to get a fix to the DFO roundabout mayhem. I've also met with the management of DFO and the Sydney Olympic Park Authority to make clear that they have an obligation to the local community to do their bit to ease traffic congestion during periods of peak demand.</para>
<para>This year, I was finally advised that the project's cost had increased dramatically, almost doubling, and also required the total demolition of Bressington Park. Neither of these were acceptable nor viable options. So, with the state member for Parramatta, Donna Davis, we have pushed Transport for NSW to come up with an alternate plan that would more quickly improve the safety and traffic flow through the roundabout.</para>
<para>I am happy to say that we have now taken the first step in upgrading the traffic light infrastructure at the roundabout. This is an important first step to improve safety for drivers, and Transport for NSW believes it could be in place in the next 12 months. The local community has waited far too long for Australia's worst roundabout to be fixed. I will continue working with Transport for NSW to improve the situation there.</para>
<para>On a brighter note, this week was an exciting week for Sydneysiders. We saw the long-awaited opening of the new Sydney Metro, a transformative public transport project that will be the biggest change to how my city moves around since the opening of the Harbour Bridge. Sydneysiders were genuinely excited by this product. They lined up from 1 am to get the first metro at 4.54 in the morning. They held up signs, took selfies and posted them online.</para>
<para>Projects like the metro require long-term vision. The metro was a big idea. It required vision to initiate it and see it through. It is right that we pay tribute to all the people involved in its completion, including former Liberal premiers of New South Wales, Mike Baird, Gladys Berejiklian and Dominic Perrottet, as well as the Labor Premier, Chris Minns and transport minister, Jo Haylen. Politics at its best is about having a clear vision.</para>
<para>I look forward to the day when four new metro stations will open in my electorate at Five Dock, Burwood North, North Strathfield and Sydney Olympic Park. These stations will transform our community, allowing us to reduce car dependency, build housing close to transport and create walkable main streets with local businesses. That is my vision for my electorate, and it is a long-term vision that will require some patience, long-term collaboration, and support for residents and businesses through the construction. But the payoff will be a community with better, more modern infrastructure that meets the needs of residents now and in the future, a vision I am proud to share with Reid constituents.</para>
<para>House adjourned at 19:59</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>NOTICES</title>
        <page.no>108</page.no>
        <type>NOTICES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Presentation</title>
          <page.no>108</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="">Wednesday, 21 August 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 Archer</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">)</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">
            </span>took the chair at 09:30.</span>
        </p>
      </body>
    </business.start>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS</title>
        <page.no>109</page.no>
        <type>CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fowler Electorate: Education, Fowler Electorate: Community Events, Vietnam Veterans' Day</title>
          <page.no>109</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LE</name>
    <name.id>295676</name.id>
    <electorate>Fowler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My community of Fowler was filled with celebrations in the past few weeks, and I had the honour to participate and share in the great milestones reached by many in my wonderful and diverse communities. Prairiewood High School marked its 40th anniversary, and Carramar Public School celebrated its 100th birthday. Both schools celebrated their pride and joy in public education. It was great to hear past and present principals, staff and students of both schools talk about how they worked so hard to create an environment of learning for students to strive for excellence, despite the lack of funding and resources. Education, as we all know, is the key to the future for many young people. This is more so for the young people in my community of Fowler, many of whom came from war-ravaged countries. Like me, their parents instilled in them the importance of studying and working hard to be part of this wonderful country that we now call home. I want to acknowledge the commitment and dedication of staff and principals, who continue to soldier on, encouraging our young to learn and reach for the stars.</para>
<para>As you know, I have one of the most multifaith communities in this country. I attended the 100th anniversary of the Fairfield Seventh Day Adventists, marked with inspirational stories and uplifting songs. I want to thank Pastor Edison Akrawi, Pastor Cheonneth Strickland, the Fiji Parish Choir group and the congregation for the beautiful service and the lunch served on the day. I was also honoured to be part of the St Rita Melkite Catholic church of Liverpool's 20th anniversary dinner, held at the Marconi on the weekend. The St Rita congregation, with its bishop, His Grace Robert Rabat DD, and the parish priest, Father Antonios Ibrahim, shared about the importance of the community's faith while at the same time emphasising the need for us all to embrace our multicultural community and respect one another. There are many other distinguished religious leaders, as well as our elected local and state representatives, who joined in the celebration.</para>
<para>Last but not least, I was part of the Long Tan Day commemoration, which is now known as Vietnam Veterans' Day. This is an important day for me, as it's a reminder to me of the personal sacrifices Australians and Vietnamese Australians have made in defending freedom and democracy. Many lives have been lost, including innocent lives, in the fight for freedom and democracy. I know that, for many Vietnam veterans, there are still old wounds, physical and mental. I want you to know that what you fought for wasn't in vain. It's due to your courage and service to Australia that you have enabled me, my late mother and my siblings to rebuild a new life here and to have the opportunity to call Australia our second homeland. I also want to thank your families for supporting you through these challenging times. Where I am today, standing in this House, is due to your courage and sacrifice. Lest we forget.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gilmore Electorate: Mental Health, Gilmore Electorate: Roads</title>
          <page.no>109</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs PHILLIPS</name>
    <name.id>147140</name.id>
    <electorate>Gilmore</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Mental health support is something that I am passionate about, because I know how crucial it is to communities in regional and rural areas like my electorate of Gilmore. Providing free, accessible mental health support close to home is particularly important for our young people, which is why I was so pleased last Friday to cut the bright, green ribbon and open the long-awaited headspace service in Kiama. Over the last few years, bushfires, floods and the pandemic have really taken their toll on people's mental health, particularly that of our young people. This was acute around Kiama following the tragic loss of young lives to suicide.</para>
<para>I fought hard on behalf of this devastated community to establish a dedicated headspace service, which will also support young people living in Gerringong, Jamberoo and surrounding villages. Youth in the Kiama region previously had to travel to Nowra or Wollongong to access headspace services, but the Albanese government's investment of $839,000 this financial year for the commissioning and operation of the centre will help alleviate these barriers. This close-knit coastal community has had to bear a burden that no-one ever wants to experience, and there has been no greater need for a headspace service than in Kiama, which is why I fought so hard for it. I've seen what a difference headspace can make to the lives of local young people, having delivered the centre I promised in Batemans Bay and seeing the amazing work of headspace Nowra over many years. I am proud to have delivered this critically important mental health service for young people in Kiama.</para>
<para>This month I was also thrilled to cut the ribbon on another important major road project, the Far North Collector Road at Bangalee, near Nowra. Fully funded by the Australian government, the $35 million road will take traffic off the Princes Highway while reducing travel times for residents who travel between North Nowra, Bomaderry and Cambewarra. After consultation with local experts in local Dharawal language, the new road has been named Bannada Way, which is southern Dharawal for Bomaderry Creek, or 'running water'.</para>
<para>Building the Far North Collector Road Network included the construction of four new bridges, including the 108-metre-long bridge over Bomaderry Creek and flood plain, and three new roundabouts. The project involved 60,000 tonnes of bridging and drainage materials, 6,000 tonnes of asphalt and more than 10,000 tonnes of concrete. The project supported 250 jobs during construction. This critical piece of infrastructure will benefit the Shoalhaven for decades to come and is yet another example of this government delivering road safety projects that will transform the lives of people living in regional communities.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>AgriFutures Rural Women's Award</title>
          <page.no>110</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RAMSEY</name>
    <name.id>HWS</name.id>
    <electorate>Grey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last night I had the great pleasure of attending the AgriFutures Rural Women's Award event in the Great Hall. There were 600 of us there, celebrating the best and finest of Australia's young female entrepreneurs in the agricultural sector.</para>
<para>The award winner was Tanya Egerton. She's from the Northern Territory and she started up a not-for-profit organisation that is opening up op shops on remote Indigenous communities, bringing in clothes from outside, letting the ladies from the community run the op shop and then put those profits back into their own communities. It is highly commendable, as are the other six finalists' projects—everything from putting Australian tuna back into tuna tins in Australia, which we used to do in Port Lincoln, in my home electorate, and we no longer do, to people setting up complementary health services in rural areas.</para>
<para>Of course, one of my favourites is the one that comes from my electorate. Nikki Atkinson lives in a small community not so far from Port Augusta, at Wilmington, in what we would call Horrocks Pass. She has established a fashion label and is making beautiful woollen wedding gowns out of superfine merino wool that they produce on their property. It's called Horrocks Vale Collections. In fact, she'll be taking her collection to London in the next couple of weeks, to a huge bridal exposition there. So good luck to Nikki. The reason I harp on about Nikki a bit is that she comes from my home town of Kimba—in fact, my home community of Buckleboo. I went to school with her father and have watched Nikki grow up. Both she and her parents are personal friends.</para>
<para>I'm driven to also inform the parliament that there were three SA finalists vying for the award last night. One of the others also came from my home community of Buckelboo. In fact, she grew up on the farm alongside mine, and her brother now leases part of my property. Susie Williams lives down in the Fleurieu Peninsula and has started up a platform delivering news services to agricultural communities.</para>
<para>So it was tick, tick, tick—there were seven ticks last night. It was a great celebration of agriculture and of the females that work and make a real difference in agricultural communities. I'm one of those people who managed to establish a successful farm on the back of the knowledge that the way for your farm to succeed is to marry a schoolteacher or nurse, who provides off-farm income. I'm not the only one that's chosen that pathway! But those women that join us in the job of feeding Australia are wonderful, and they excel.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Carter, Ms Sarah</title>
          <page.no>110</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SHORTEN</name>
    <name.id>00ATG</name.id>
    <electorate>Maribyrnong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last Friday I attended the funeral of Sarah Carter at Flemington Racecourse. She was just 45 years old. I acknowledge the loss to her family and I acknowledge her mother, Gaynor, who's listening to this as we speak.</para>
<para>Sarah was the first woman to be elected Mayor of Maribyrnong three times and only the second mayor in the municipality's history to achieve emeritus status, the highest recognition for distinguished service in local government leadership. She received multiple awards for her contribution to the council since being first elected in 2008 and she was serving her fourth consecutive term. She was simply the most decorated female councillor in a city that was established in 1859.</para>
<para>Sarah was passionate about Maribyrnong and the local community. She lived a life of service, with her work grounded in grassroots community engagement. There was an energy, an enthusiasm, creative thinking and a fearlessness to Sarah which was unmatched.</para>
<para>Sarah was also a tireless international advocate. Those gathered at the service heard of Sarah's remarkable efforts with the charity organisation Save the Children. Mat Tinkler, CEO of the organisation, spoke beautifully of shared memories, and of offering Ms Carter the job of leading a program to visit aid and development programs overseas, which one friend described as her life's work. Mr Tinkler said that Sarah called it her 'dream job', but he said to her, 'I think you're the dream candidate.' She'll also be remembered for her fight to reinstate IVF treatments during COVID lockdowns.</para>
<para>In the weeks that have passed since we learned of Sarah's death she's been remembered as a force of nature—in the words of her mother, an intelligent, vivacious, caring woman who set out singly to make a difference in many people's lives. She had the ability to make every individual feel like they were the most important person in the room. Her father, David, said that, despite the overwhelming loss of his daughter, he felt immense pride that her life had been marked by unwavering dedication and compassion and a fierce commitment to making the world a better place.</para>
<para>It's now the job of all of us who knew Sarah to make sure that her legacy lives on, and I acknowledge the Australian Workers Union will have a memorial prize for their women members named after her. Victorian minister Natalie Hutchins spoke passionately. A long-time friend and mentor, she spoke at the funeral, remembering Sarah as a brilliant and captivating woman, and sorely missed. I think it's a fitting tribute to Sarah, who didn't just break but smashed the glass ceiling, that there will be an award.</para>
<para>I'd also like to thank so many federal MPs, including coalition MPs Michael McCormack, Darren Chester and Dan Tehan, along with Sharon Claydon, who flew interstate, and the Victorian federal MPs, for being there.</para>
<para>Who knows what Sarah could've accomplished next? We all regret her passing. She was a passionate children's champion. She was a community leader who represented the best of Labor. She will be missed. Sarah Carter was the best of us.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Paris Olympic and Paralympic Games</title>
          <page.no>111</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PITT</name>
    <name.id>148150</name.id>
    <electorate>Hinkler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Olympics might be over, but we're only halfway; we've got the Paralympics coming up. Like every member of this place, I had a number of participants in the Olympics, and I do want to give them a shout-out, because they performed exceptionally well, coming from regional Queensland and going all the way to Paris.</para>
<para>Tarin Gollshewsky is a teacher in Bundaberg, would you believe? She made her Olympic debut in the discus. She went in ranked 30th. She finished in 15th place and threw a personal best of 62.36 metres. I'm sure Ms Gollshewsky will be warmly welcomed back by her students and pupils. They'll be very excited to hear all about the Olympics.</para>
<para>Matt Hauser, the triathlon man from Hervey Bay, finished seventh. That is Australia's best men's result in the Olympics in two decades. He is a machine. He was part of the mixed relay, and Team Australia finished in 12th place. Of course, we all saw the footage of the swimming in the Seine, so he should get an award for bravery as well!</para>
<para>In swimming, Isaac Cooper from Bundaberg swam in the 100-metre backstroke. He was part of the 4 x 100-metre medley relay team, which placed sixth in the final. He is an incredible athlete. He works really hard.</para>
<para>Rebecca Greiner from Bundaberg, a member of the Hockeyroos, made her Olympic debut as well. The Hockeyroos were unbeaten in pool B but, unfortunately, went down to China in the quarterfinals.</para>
<para>Shannon Davey is the boy from Narrabri, but he moved to Bundaberg to train with Attila Kovacs, so we're claiming him. He's with us. He's in the green-and-gold tracksuit, so he's definitely one of ours in Australia. He trains at the Attila Boxing Academy.</para>
<para>In the Paralympics we've got some absolute champions. Rheed McCracken from Bundy is in the 100-metre T34 and the 800-metre T34. This will be his fourth Paralympics. He won silver in Tokyo, he won silver in Rio, he won silver in London, and I know he's going to go all-out to get one more at the Paralympics in Paris.</para>
<para>Sam Schmidt, the Bundaberg discus thrower in the F38, competed in the Tokyo Paralympics, where she finished sixth. She came into my office just in the last couple of weeks. She's a lovely young lady. I think my staff were more excited to meet her than anyone else. She was very much welcomed. She is just a ball of fun.</para>
<para>Keira Stephens from Hervey Bay swims the 100-metre breaststroke SB9 and the 200-metre individual medley SM10. She made her Paralympics debut in Tokyo, where she won bronze and broke the Australian record with a personal best.</para>
<para>In the last few seconds I've got, I thank one of my staff: Liz Carson. Liz has put in her notice after nine years of service to my office as a media adviser. Everyone in this place knows it's the media adviser that gets the 4 am call to see if the boss can be on at five. They also get the late-night call to show up to run the live view for Sky. Liz has been a wonderful part of my office, and she leaves with our gratitude and my gratitude. I wish her and the girls the best of luck in her new ventures. Hopefully, we'll still see you out on the polling booth, Liz; we'll be looking forward to some more help! Good luck with the new adventure, and thank you so much for your service. You've been a wonderful part of the team.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taylor, Ms Carole</title>
          <page.no>112</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SCRYMGOUR</name>
    <name.id>F2S</name.id>
    <electorate>Lingiari</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I take the opportunity today to mark the recent death of Carole Taylor, a long-time and highly respected Labor branch member in my electorate of Lingiari. Carole passed away peacefully earlier this month in Alice Springs' palliative care unit.</para>
<para>Carole came to Alice Springs from her home in Victoria. Carole was the CEO of Drug and Alcohol Services Australia from 2014 to 2022. A lifelong true believer, Carole was a fierce advocate for reducing the devastation from drugs, alcohol and other addiction problems, and their impacts on people's lives and in the community. Carole made sure that no-one was left behind and that the most vulnerable people received the care they deserved. It was often said: 'If you come into Alice Springs looking for Carole Taylor, just look for the person doing the toughest job.' Carole was always ready for a challenge, and she was a special person who gave freely of herself without question and throughout her life.</para>
<para>Carole spent many years working for the Hawke and Keating governments, most notably in the office of then minister Peter Staples. She was widely admired by her peers for her ability and skills. Carole worked hard as the senior private secretary, negotiating with cabinet ministers to loosen their grip on their funding for achieving better policy and program outcomes—especially in aged care and particularly for regional and remote areas of Western Australia, the Northern Territory and Queensland. She was a committed champion for improving the lives of others.</para>
<para>Carole hated flying in small planes but regularly made trips throughout remote northern Australia to make sure ministers and staff saw firsthand the conditions under which people were living. She was the flag-bearer for social justice issues and a great fighter for the rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians. Her life was one of commitment and service. She made a real difference to the lives of so many, and she had a deep love for and compassion to leave something of lasting value for Australia.</para>
<para>This is how Carole lived her life right to the very end. She'll be missed. My condolences go to her extended family and to her many friends. I particularly mention the former member for Lingiari, Warren Snowdon, who was a very close friend. And I was lucky enough to know her. Farewell, Carole Taylor; your legacy will always shine bright.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Braddon Electorate: Environmental Approvals</title>
          <page.no>112</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PEARCE</name>
    <name.id>282306</name.id>
    <electorate>Braddon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Albanese government's list of broken promises to the electorate of Braddon and the great state of Tasmania is long, but it's getting longer. The local Labor representative says she is 'building a better Braddon'. But nothing is being built thanks to this government. Business owners are telling me loud and clear that things are pretty bleak. Labor has created a cost-of-living crisis—and a cost-of-doing-business crisis, which often isn't talked about. No industry in Braddon is safe from its economic wrecking ball, and its mantra appears to be 'delay, delay, delay'—to kick things down the road.</para>
<para>When it comes to approvals through the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, the EPBC Act: on Tasmania's West Coast, the mineral epicentre of Tasmania, Minister Plibersek refuses to provide certainty for salmon farming in Macquarie Harbour. The minister's inaction is impacting the entire community right across the West Coast and threatening the state's salmon industry. There's no scientific evidence that demonstrates the removing of aquaculture from Macquarie Harbour—which is seven times the size of Sydney Harbour—will ensure the future of the maugean skate. It's dishonest to lay the blame at the feet of the salmon industry, and it's time for this unnecessary EPBC process to end.</para>
<para>Go just an hour up the road to the Rosebery MMG mine; they continue to wait for Minister Plibersek to make a decision on their critical tailings dam facility at South Marionoak as an alternative storage option for their fast-reaching capacity. Years of delay and a lack of leadership are risking the livelihoods of 550 workers. That's 550 families. Just above that is Robbins Island, where wind farm proponents are waiting for, guess what, an EPBC approval. They're kicking it down the road. This would be a massive boost for renewable energy in the great state. It will provide clean energy for tens of thousands of homes, create hundreds of jobs and drive billions of dollars of economic development in our region. The project has undergone some of the most rigorous approvals in the world. It's time to get it done. Let these industries know how they can move forward.</para>
<para>Located within the recently announced North West Renewable Energy Zone, the project is situated perfectly to feed into the proposed Marinus Link and the North West Transmission Developments upgrade. The Albanese government should be giving this priority. The only thing you can trust about this government is that they will continue to stifle Braddon's economic prosperity. I call on the respective ministers to look after and to prosecute the expedience of these approvals for these valuable industries in the great state of Tasmania.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Hunter Electorate: Local Sporting Champions</title>
          <page.no>113</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REPACHOLI</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Hunter has produced a stack of professional and elite athletes, and I want to make sure that we support the next crop of our local sporting talent so that our next generation of superstars comes from the Hunter too. Unfortunately, talent and determination alone are not always enough to reach the top. Participating in high-level sport comes at a cost, and it's mostly parents who put their hands in their pockets to get their children to competitions.</para>
<para>The Local Sporting Champions program provides financial assistance to young people to compete, coach or umpire in their chosen sport. I know firsthand how expensive your chosen sports can be, especially when you're competing on the state, national or international stage. These small grants make a lot of difference to the athletes and their parents. I want to congratulate our recent local sporting champions.</para>
<para>Allira Brennan, Lucy Bender, Isabelle Walters, Kiara Walters, Tayah Koeford, Charlotte Moore, Madison Fairlie, Lily Stewart, Molly Bailey, Matilda Bailey, Sienna Procter, Olivia Wearing and Gracie Brislane represented the Cessnock District Netball Association at the HART Junior State Titles. Sienna Downey participated in the Junior State Titles, representing Westlakes Netball Association. Jade Constable went to the state titles, representing Muswellbrook Netball Association. Scarlett Cox from Cessnock High School completed at a state level in diving. Carrie Phillips competed for the Hunter Hurricanes at the Australian Youth Water Polo Championships. Keira Carlson from Wyee Point participated in the athletics at the Australian track and field championships. Kye McDermott from Mingara Aquatic Swim Club went to the Australian Age Championships for swimming. Zane Bourke went to the world championships for BMX. Bethanu Klepzig represented NSWPSSA at the School Sport Australia swimming championships. Khai Leigh represented Australia at the 2024 World Aquatics Men's U16 Water Polo World Championships. Ben Frost represented New South Wales Country at the Australian Youth Championships for baseball. Cameron Gawn from NUSwim Swimming Club went to the Australian Age Championships for swimming. Drew Kremer competed in the ProMX Series for Motorcycling NSW. Lexie Phillips from Novocastrian Swim Club went to the Australian Age and MC Swimming Championships, and, finally, Jamie Illfield-Bell from Star Club Equestrian program competed in the CPEDI Paralympic Qualifier at Willinga Park.</para>
<para>Congratulations to all of these local sporting champions. Sport has always been a massive part of the Hunter, and its amazing to see so many young people from our area still competing at a high level.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bowman Electorate: Olympic Games</title>
          <page.no>113</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:53</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PIKE</name>
    <name.id>300120</name.id>
    <electorate>Bowman</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On a very similar theme to the member for Hunter, I want to acknowledge some athletes from my electorate who stood on the world stage and competed in the recent Paris Olympic Games. Melissa Wu made the final of the 10-metre diving in her fifth Olympic Games. Cassiel Rousseau finished fourth in the men's competition. Shayna Jack was part of Australia's gold-medal-winning 4x100-metre freestyle team. Straddie local Ethan Ewing did us proud by making the quarterfinals of the surfing competition in Tahiti. Reece Holder ran his fastest ever time to qualify for the semifinals of the 400-metre sprint. Birkdale's Shannan Davey made his debut in the boxing.</para>
<para>One of the greatest stories of the games was Jess Fox and Noemie Fox winning three gold medals between them in the canoe slalom. In eight years time, my community of the Redlands will play host to the canoe slalom events at the 2032 Olympic Games. The Olympic whitewater arena in Birkdale is sure to continue to be a rich source of gold for us at the Brisbane Games.</para>
<para>Twenty thirty-two presents us with a unique opportunity: beyond the two weeks of competition, we must ensure a lasting legacy of infrastructure for our community. Sadly, the state Labor government has demonstrated nothing but chaos and confusion when it comes to games planning. Venues aren't yet sorted, let alone any legacy projects. As we try to fix this mess, I will be pushing to ensure that the Redlands get our fair share. I'll be fighting to secure funding to extend Brisbane's Metro system from Carindale, past the Sleeman sports centre and through to the Redlands. Not only will this infrastructure be essential for the fortnight of competition; it will also contribute to better connecting Redlanders with the amenities and employment opportunities of Brisbane city. As the Redlands grow, this project will be essential to maintaining the quality of life for our residents.</para>
<para>With cricket appearing in the 2032 games, government investment in the Redlands can make the tournament one to remember. Peter Burge Oval in Wellington Point, where I'll be this Saturday for the start of the local Twenty20 competition, could easily play host to some of the Twenty20 matches in the tournament if we can secure the necessary investment at that venue. There has also been some discussion of having surf ironman as part of the 2032 program. What better place to host it than North Stradbroke Island? I'll be working to ensure our island is well positioned to stake a claim to that iconic Olympic debut.</para>
<para>With so many local athletes excelling in Paris, exciting times are ahead as we look forward to the games in Queensland in 2032. I trust that, unlike Paris, our opening ceremony will showcase the best of our local culture in a way that unites us rather than divides us. I look forward to the generational opportunity to showcase the best of South-East Queensland, to secure new investment for our communities and to win more gold medals for Australia.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Menslink Great Walk</title>
          <page.no>114</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DAVID SMITH</name>
    <name.id>276714</name.id>
    <electorate>Bean</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last year I participated in a 142-kilometre walk around Canberra over five days, with an amazing group of Canberrans, to raise awareness about and support Menslink, and we are starting to prepare for this year's walk. Menslink is a great Canberra organisation, based in Bean, helping young guys going through challenging times through free counselling, volunteer mentoring and education programs. Over 20 years they have helped thousands of boys and young men through tough or lonely times. Menslink's programs help improve mental fitness, combat domestic violence, reduce youth suicide, increase respect and positive behaviours and help create stronger communities. They work well with our school communities.</para>
<para>More than 25 community and public and private sector leaders participated last year, raising over $300,000. This year 35 walkers have registered to walk in November. I'll be walking with Sarah Hardie from Isla & Gray Financial Advice; Pete Russell from International SOS; Jim Boekel from Bluerydge; Ben Henderson from PCI Sports and Capital Chemist; Kane Piper from Jayco Canberra; Al Croston from Jude Digital; Suzie Hoitink from HTNK Advisory; Lachlan Exton from Highroad; Michael Hoole from Approach Consulting; Pierre Huetter from Purdon consulting; Michael Battenally, the Menslink chair; Jess Peil from Bravehearts; Andy Friend from Performance Friend; Ben Gathercole, the Menslink CEO; Steph Bates from Chartertech; Bjarne Kragh from Southside Physio; Todd Wright from 3 Sides Marketing; Alex Hoitink from HTNK Advisory; Paul Eccles from PSC Insurance Brokers; Alex Brennan from Blueink; Gareth Halverson from Civium Property Group; Michael O'Grady from 4Site; Anthony Simpson from BAL Lawyers; Fabian Muscat from Elite Heating and Cooling; Emily Shoemark from SHG Lawyers; Ray Johnson from ACT Corrections; Anthony Hill from the Vikings Group; Dan Hawcroft from the Property Collective; Julie Dobinson from DDCS Lawyers; Craig Davis and Arran Curll from the Pass Foundation; Scott Alexander from 35 South; Sarah D'Arcy and Hugo Anderson from PwC; and Jeremy Archer from Workin' Gear.</para>
<para>Thank you to the Menslink crew that organised and ran the walk last year alongside their day-to-day work; they are assisting with our preparations this year. Thank you to all those who have taken their time to participate. It's easy for all of us to be time poor, but it's a great walk for a great cause. You can contribute via www.menslinkgreatwalk.com.au. If you're up for a walk, give me a call.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>282237</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>In accordance with standing order 193, the time for members' constituency statements has concluded.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>114</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation (Multinational—Global and Domestic Minimum Tax) Bill 2024, Taxation (Multinational—Global and Domestic Minimum Tax) Imposition Bill 2024, Treasury Laws Amendment (Multinational—Global and Domestic Minimum Tax) (Consequential) Bill 2024</title>
          <page.no>114</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="r7220" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Taxation (Multinational—Global and Domestic Minimum Tax) Bill 2024</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <a href="r7221" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Taxation (Multinational—Global and Domestic Minimum Tax) Imposition Bill 2024</span>
                </p>
              </a>
            </p>
            <a href="r7222" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Treasury Laws Amendment (Multinational—Global and Domestic Minimum Tax) (Consequential) Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>114</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RAE</name>
    <name.id>300122</name.id>
    <electorate>Hawke</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The challenge of taxing multinationals is not unique to Australia. It's a global issue that requires a coordinated international response. The rise of the digital economy, the increasing mobility of capital and the complex nature of multinational enterprises have outpaced the capacity of traditional tax systems. As a result, governments around the world have found themselves grappling with how to ensure that large corporations pay their fair share of tax.</para>
<para>I'm very proud to say that Australia has been at the forefront of these international efforts. As part of our 2023-24 budget, we announced that Australia would join a group of first movers to implement both a global minimum tax and a domestic minimum tax of 15 per cent. Applicable to multinational enterprises with an annual global revenue of approximately $1.2 billion or more, this tax will ensure that large multinational corporations pay a minimum level of tax on income generated in each jurisdiction where they operate. By cooperating with our international partners to set a floor on corporate tax rates, the Albanese Labor government is reducing the incentive for multinationals to engage in aggressive tax planning and profit shifting. This will not only protect Australia's corporate tax base but also make our country a more attractive place to invest. In a world where capital is increasingly mobile, having a stable and predictable global tax environment is crucial for attracting long-term investment and fostering economic growth.</para>
<para>In addition to a global minimum tax, this legislation—the Taxation (Multinational—Global and Domestic Minimum Tax) Bill 2024 and related bills—also implements a domestic minimum tax which will give Australia additional taxing rights on the low-taxed Australian income of large multinational groups. This is a critical safeguard to ensure that Australia collects revenue from local undertaxed profits.</para>
<para>This is not just about protecting our revenue base; it is also about fairness. It's about ensuring that all businesses—whether large or small, domestic or multinational—contribute their fair share to the society from which they benefit. It's about creating a level playing field where businesses compete on the basis of innovation, efficiency and service, not on their ability to exploit loopholes in a tax system.</para>
<para>These measures form just one component of the Albanese Labor government's strong agenda on multinational tax avoidance. We understand that such a complex issue cannot be tackled with just a single piece of legislation. That's why we have already delivered four separate multinational tax reforms with a further five to come alongside the global and domestic minimum taxes.</para>
<para>One of the key reforms we've already delivered focuses on increasing transparency around corporate structures and tax arrangements. Multinational corporations often operate through a complex web of subsidiaries and affiliates, making it difficult for tax authorities to track where profits are being generated and where they are being taxed. To address this issue, the Albanese government has introduced a new subsidiary disclosure law, which requires public companies to disclose information on their subsidiaries and their country of tax residency. This will shine a light on how companies structure their subsidiaries specifically for tax purposes and will increase transparency on corporate structures and whether they are operating with opaque tax arrangements. This reform is a significant step in our efforts to combat tax avoidance. By requiring companies to disclose this information, we are providing tax authorities with the tools they need to identify aggressive tax-planning strategies and ensure that companies are paying their fair share of tax. At the same time, we're sending a clear message to multinationals that they must operate with transparency and accountability if they wish to do business here in Australia.</para>
<para>Transparency alone is not enough. We must also ensure that companies benefiting from government contracts are contributing their fair share of tax. That's why, as part of the Albanese Labor government's Buy Australian Plan, we've implemented the Fair Go Procurement Framework. This framework requires companies tendering for government contracts valued above $200,000 to disclose their country of tax residency. The Fair Go Procurement Framework is about ensuring that taxpayer dollars are spent on companies that are good corporate citizens. Companies that benefit from government contracts have a responsibility to contribute to the public purse, and this framework ensures that they are meeting that responsibility. It's a remarkably simple principle: if you want to do business with the Australian government, you must pay your fair share of tax.</para>
<para>As part of our broader multinational tax integrity agenda, we are also progressing legislation to create a public country-by-country reporting register. This register will require certain large multinationals to disclose their tax affairs on a country-by-country basis, providing greater transparency as to where they are paying tax and where they are generating profits. In addition to country-by-country reporting, we're also implementing a public register of beneficial ownership. This will require companies to disclose who ultimately owns or controls them, providing further transparency and making it harder for individuals to hide their wealth through complex corporate structures. This reform is a critical tool in the fight against tax evasion, money laundering and other forms of financial crime. By shining a light on who owns and controls companies, we're making it harder for individuals to hide their assets and evade their tax responsibilities. This is about ensuring that everyone, regardless of their wealth or status, pays their fair share of tax here in Australia.</para>
<para>One of the most common strategies used by multinationals to minimise their tax liabilities is thin capitalisation, where companies artificially inflate their interest expenses through related-party debt. This reduces their taxable income here in Australia, allowing them to shift their profits offshore. To address this, we've tightened Australia's thin-capitalisation rules, reducing the ability of multinationals to engage in this practice. These reforms will ensure that interest deductions are more closely aligned with the economic substance of the debt and that multinationals are not able to exploit the system to avoid paying their fair share of tax. Furthermore, as part of our multinational tax integrity agenda, the Albanese Labor government is introducing a new royalty penalty for significant global entities that avoid Australian royalties withholding tax. This penalty will ensure that large multinationals cannot avoid their tax obligations by understating the value of royalty payments or disguising them as some other kind of transaction.</para>
<para>The fight against tax avoidance requires not only strong laws but also remarkably strong enforcement. That's why the Albanese Labor government has increased funding for the ATO's Tax Avoidance Taskforce, extending its operation and increasing its resources to crack down on tax dodging by multinational enterprises, large Australian public and private groups and extremely wealthy individuals. Since its inception, the Tax Avoidance Taskforce has been instrumental in detecting and deterring tax avoidance. It has generated billions of dollars in additional revenue and has sent a strong message to those who seek to evade their tax responsibilities. By providing the ATO with the resources it needs, we're ensuring that the taskforce can continue its vital work and that those who try to cheat the system are held to account.</para>
<para>The economic impact of these reforms cannot be overstated. Economists estimate that close to 40 per cent of multinational profits, which is roughly equivalent to around $900 billion, has shifted to low-tax countries each and every year. This has a devastating impact on the revenue base of countries like ours, where corporate tax comprises a significant portion of our total revenue. The OECD estimates that, by making multinationals pay a minimum effective tax rate of 15 per cent, annual global revenue gains could exceed $300 billion. For Australia, the benefits of these reforms are crystal clear. By ensuring that multinationals pay their fair share of tax, we're protecting our revenue base, levelling the playing field for Australian businesses and ensuring that the benefits of economic activity in Australia are shared more broadly with the Australian people. At the same time, we're positioning Australia as a leader in global tax reform and setting a new standard for transparency, fairness and accountability in the international tax system. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
    <electorate>Riverina</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>There are some aspects of the member for Hawke's speech which I earnestly agree with. If you do business in Australia and with the Australian government, yes, you should pay your fair share of tax. There's no question about that. For many multinational entities operating in the global village that the world is today, as long as they have a big team of accountants, lawyers and smart financial people, they have unfortunately been able to avoid paying the tax they should. This is of concern.</para>
<para>We as a coalition welcome the continuation of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development's two-pillar solution to multinational tax avoidance. This was started by the coalition. It's being continued by the government. We very much committed to the two-pillars solution in October 2021. This commitment was based on securing an exemption for resources and financial services companies from the framework so that Australia's tax base would not be eroded. The landmark agreement to secure such negotiations, considerations and outcomes was championed by former coalition finance minister, Senator Mathias Cormann, in his role as OECD Secretary-General. He began that particular position in June 2021.</para>
<para>We took extensive action over nine years of government between 2013 and 2022 to address multinational tax avoidance. As the G20 host in 2014, Australia played a leading role in the original project to ensure that there was a clampdown on multinational enterprises and entities doing what they had done previously for many years, and that is avoiding tax. For every business I know—and I ran a small business—the object of the business is to earn money and employ people.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">A division having been called in the House of Representatives—</inline></para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 10:13 to 10:29</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>When you run a business, it's your job to continue that business's success. If you don't, you then end up having to qualify to ASIC and other entities why you're running a business at a loss, and you can't do that beyond three successive years. The objective is to minimise tax, but in the right and proper way—the legal way—and, as I said before, to employ people to provide a good or service; almost all Australian companies do just that. But multinational entities, because of the swathe of financial advisers and lawyers and other people they have, have made an art out of not only minimising tax but avoiding tax. When you avoid tax, you are stopping vital funds going to governments at various levels to pay for roads, hospitals and schools, and you are avoiding paying your fair share. I remember that, when I was in business, the more GST I paid the better I knew our company was going because we were getting those receipts in, and when you get receipts in tax receipts go out. You feel a sense of pride because you're employing people and providing a good or service, and you're contributing to the wealth of the nation, the Commonwealth. That is the right thing to do.</para>
<para>As I said, the coalition took extensive action in our three terms to ensure we addressed multinational tax avoidance.</para>
<para>Government members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>We did—much to the mirth of those opposite. They weren't all here; I know, because I was the Deputy Prime Minister at the time. I know the role that Senator Cormann, as I mentioned previously, and successive treasurers, including Frydenberg, and Morrison before him, played in making sure we addressed this issue not only at home but also abroad in various fora around the world such as the G20, to crack down on multinationals who wanted to avoid paying tax at all by shifting money from Australia to elsewhere.</para>
<para>Under the coalition, Australia was an early and vigilant adopter of the OECD G20 base erosion and profit shifting recommendations. These provisions establish a multilateral approach to prevent tax avoidance and increase tax transparency to tax administrators—and it's a big job, a massive job, particularly when you've got overseas entities, huge companies, coming in with their various tax avoidance measures. I know the Greens are anti-business with their policies. If they had their way, goodness knows what mess our financial system would be in; they're very anti-big business. You have to be pro-business, whether it's international, large, medium or small. Government's objective is to create the environment in which businesses can not just survive but thrive.</para>
<para>I have been, I have to say, disappointed at some of the reckless policies brought in by the Labor government which have, I believe, been anti-business. It's not just me; I've talked to any number of chambers of commerce and to businesspeople who run large and small companies, and they are concerned as well about the business environment in which Australia operates and which the Labor government is overseeing. I was very interested to see the member for Chifley—the industry minister, no less—talk about lowering the corporate tax rate; he was quickly brought to heel and reprogrammed when the Treasurer didn't necessarily agree with his philosophy on providing a fairer corporate tax rate.</para>
<para>I was proud, when I was the small-business minister, to follow on from the good work by the former member for Higgins, Kelly O'Dwyer, and no less than Bruce Billson, who is now the Australian Small Business and Family Enterprise Ombudsman. While I was the minister in that important portfolio, the tax rate for business came down to its lowest rate for around seven decades. I worked closely with former treasurer Hockey and his successors to ensure that we did provide the framework, the landscape and the environment in which businesses could prosper.</para>
<para>The coalition government's measures included introducing the diverted profits tax, which limits a company's ability to shift profits out of Australia—that's so important—and introducing the multinational tax avoidance law, which ensures companies do not avoid a taxable presence in Australia. We also strengthened the thin capitalisation rules, strengthened transfer pricing rules, doubled the penalties for tax avoidance and established the ATO's Tax Avoidance Taskforce. I commend what the Australian Taxation Office does in this space. That particular taskforce, which was created on 1 July 2016, enforces existing laws and supports the government of the day's new tax avoidance measures that we put in place. Its work continues. It targets multinational enterprises, large public and private groups, and wealthy individuals, as it should.</para>
<para>From 1 July 2016 through to 30 November 2021 the ATO raised—wait for this; this is a big figure—$24.2 billion in tax liabilities against large public groups, multinational corporations, privately owned companies and wealthy groups. This generated collections of $17.3 billion. They're big figures. That pays for a lot of the aforementioned roads, infrastructure, hospitals and schools. It filters down through to the states, making sure that we have the services and amenities that we should provide Australian taxpayers and others besides—Australians who do pay their fair share, Australians who don't have the benefit of large teams of accountants, compliance officers, legal eagles and the like to avoid paying tax. Interestingly, $15.3 billion of the liabilities were raised against large public groups and multinationals, and $13.6 billion of the liabilities and $9½ billion of collections are attributable to the taskforce.</para>
<para>Our system is very much undermined when people or organisations avoid their tax obligations. In one sense, paying tax is something that people should have a sense of pride in. It means that their company is making a profit. It means that what they're doing as a company is succeeding. It means that they're doing the right thing by the country, which puts the framework around them and supports them, and it means that they're doing the right thing by their customers.</para>
<para>This legislation also highlights an important point in that Labor has broken its promises on tax. At the last election Labor said one of its main focuses was to be on addressing multinational tax avoidance, and I'm not quite sure that it has actually met that remit. They haven't done it right. Labor's shambolic handling of country-by-country reporting and changes to thin capitalisation—something I mentioned previously—has been shown up again and again. The Treasurer said, 'We have made it very clear we don't have any proposals for tax increases, beyond working with other countries to make the multinational tax regime fairer,' but I don't think they've met their obligations in that regard.</para>
<para>What Labor has done is raise taxes on superannuation. That's something they said they wouldn't do. But we know that Labor likes tax. They like jacking up tax. They are taxing unrealised capital gains. I tell you what: if you don't believe or agree with what I'm saying, go and talk to a worried farmer. Their farm might be worth a certain amount now, and over time the value of that land increases. What Labor wants to do and has proposed to do is to make that farmer pay an unrealised capital gain on that farm before the farmer has even decided to sell the farm. That not only creates complications for the farmer and how they're doing their business but also generates complicated work for accountants. It slugs the farmer unfairly. She or he has not actually sold the farm, but they're having to pay an unrealised gain. It's bonkers. It's absolute nutty policy. But we know how uncompetitive our farmers are under Labor laws. It's an anti-agriculture government, let's face it.</para>
<para>Labor is increasing taxes on franking credits. It didn't work quite well for the member for Maribyrnong when he was the opposition leader and decided he would attack franking credits during the 2019 election campaign. Some might even go so far as to say it cost him The Lodge. Thank goodness for that. But banking half a billion dollars in taxes from Australian companies, Australian retirees, Australian superannuation funds and Australian charities under the guise of whacking franking credits is not good policy.</para>
<para>Labor's ended small-business tax concessions. It has absolutely taken a big stick to the instant asset write-off provisions. I know we had them as an unlimited amount as a COVID measure, but, I tell you what, they were far better under us than they ever will be under Labor. What Labor doesn't realise is that this is enhancing and promoting, and giving small business the opportunity to buy a ute, particularly if you're a tradie, or for any other company—to write off those profit-making assets, which ends up back in the tax coffers anyway.</para>
<para>This taxation measure is something that the coalition believes is overdue. Labor needs to stop whacking everybody with its high taxes, but the bill is, as I say, something that very much needs to be looked at.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KHALIL</name>
    <name.id>101351</name.id>
    <electorate>Wills</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Across the country, Australians are struggling with the cost of living. It is a real issue that people feel every day. A lot of my constituents are reaching out to my office for assistance. Since I became the member for Wills in 2016, people across my electorate have shared that their aspirations for good-quality, affordable housing have become more and more out of reach. It's a story that's reflected, I think, across Australia, and it's not new. It's an issue that has been deepened, frankly, by 10 years of inaction from the previous coalition government. They inflicted immense damage on the economy and our country's fiscal position, which we've had to rectify. As usual, it takes a Labor government to come in and begin the hard work of repairing the damage—the damage that the Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison years inflicted upon ordinary Australians. That's why we've delivered two surpluses in a row.</para>
<para>This could not be clearer when we consider how the coalition completely abrogated its responsibility for multinational corporations' tax avoidance. For a decade the coalition government sat on the treasury benches and allowed the issue of tax avoidance to fester. They ignored clear advice and efforts at international collaboration that had been championed by the last Labor government, the Gillard government. The Albanese Labor government is finally delivering this action and developing a coordinated approach to address this key issue. Why? Because the Albanese government believes that a fairer tax system is better for all Australians.</para>
<para>Now, you can't hide your profits or your revenue if you've got a local cafe in my electorate—if you're a Pascoe Vale or a Brunswick cafe owner. You're not able to hide your revenue in a subsidiary on the Cayman Islands. No cafe owner can do that. No small-business person can do that. They are paying their fair share of tax. The average punter is paying their fair share of tax, whether they own or run a small business or whether it's their salary or their wages. They can't hide from the taxman what they make. Yet the multinationals can and do and have done so. That's why the Albanese government believes in transparency and global coordination on multinationals tax avoidance—because the system has been gamed internationally for too long. This is about ensuring that the profits of multinational companies are not hidden offshore and that they pay their fair share of tax so that it can go back into our budget and deliver the services that the Australian people need.</para>
<para>To support the government's effort to crack down on multinationals tax avoidance, the government is introducing the Taxation (Multinational—Global and Domestic Minimum Tax) Bill. This legislation delivers on the government's election commitment to ensure multinationals pay their fair share of tax by implementing a 15 per cent global and domestic minimum tax rate. It forms part of a coordinated approach across more than 130 countries to implement the OECD-G20 two-pillar solution, a 2021 international agreement to address the tax challenges that have been coupled with the rise of the digital economy. This bill also responds to the problem of large multinational corporations seeking to reduce tax by shifting profits from Australia to low-tax or no-tax jurisdictions such as the Cayman Islands, pretending that their headquarters are there, even though they're making the profits here. This effectively erodes Australia's tax base. It reduces the money that can be invested into the vital services that Australians rely upon every day.</para>
<para>To respond to the challenge of profit shifting, the government announced in the 2023-24 budget that we would implement a 15 per cent global and domestic minimum tax for multinational corporations with an annual global revenue of at least $1.2 billion. If they're making billions in revenue and profit in Australia and then pretending that their headquarters are elsewhere, in a low-tax jurisdiction, so that they pay zero tax in the dollar on the money that they make here, they're not going to get away with that anymore. They got away with it for 10 years under the previous government. Those opposite sat on their hands for 10 years. They decided to take no action.</para>
<para>The previous speaker, the member for Riverina, talked about the former treasurer Josh Frydenberg and all these great things the coalition did. They did nothing. Multinational corporations were making billions of dollars in this country—hundreds of millions of dollars—and paying next to no tax. Some of them paid zero. Some of them were able to reduce their tax bills down to 1c or 2c in the dollar because their headquarters were somewhere else—in jurisdictions where they were supposedly paying tax, which happened to be low-tax or no-tax jurisdictions. It's a scam. It's a way to avoid the responsibility of paying your fair share of tax. It's a way to avoid being like the cafe owner or the ordinary Australian punter who pays 25c or 30c in the dollar, whatever their tax bill is. They can't hide from that; the tax office follows them up. But these multinationals can make $900 million in Australia and pay five per cent, or two per cent, because they've shifted their profits or they have a low-tax-base headquarters.</para>
<para>This is an important step, and it's part of the government's broad and ambitious tax reform agenda. When multinationals pay less, Australian individuals and Australian small businesses pay more, and it's not fair. It's actually unfair. Fundamentally, for decades, billions of dollars in taxes that should have been paid here in Australia have not been paid. Under the former government, they got away with billions of dollars of unpaid tax. That money could have gone into schools, hospitals, roads, public transport or mental health. It could have gone into so many things that make a difference to people's lives, and yet the coalition allowed the profits to just wander off to the Cayman Islands or wherever it was, with no tax being paid here, even though the money was made in Australia. We need to ensure that these multinationals pay their fair share so government can invest in the services that our communities need, and that's what we are doing.</para>
<para>This is also an important step forward in ending the race to the bottom on global corporate tax rates. By ensuring that multinationals pay their fair share around the world, we are securing Australia's tax base so we can support Australians and Australian small businesses and make our economy more competitive. This required a commitment, a diplomatic effort and an engagement with other countries, and we have taken that step as a government. The last leap forward on transparency and global cooperation on taxation was introduced back in 2012 by the Gillard government. Then we had Sleepy Hollow for 10 years under the coalition. They did nothing. The previous speakers talked about a couple of little peripheral changes here and there—they did something on thin capitalisation, this and that. Guess what! Tens of billions of dollars, probably a lot more, did not go into the Australian budget, because the then government, now opposition, did nothing about it.</para>
<para>There have been 10 years of inaction and inertia. Between 2013 and 2022, while leaders across the globe bolstered efforts at international cooperation, what did the coalition government do? It turned away and sat on its hands. There were mounting calls for international coordination in the wake of the first Panama Papers, then the LuxLeaks, then the Paradise Papers, all revealing widespread and sophisticated efforts by individuals to avoid tax. And still the coalition failed to act. This was despite warnings of this challenge from everyone and every organisation, including the IMF and the World Bank Group President. And the first thing the coalition did when they came into government back then, after the Gillard government—you know what it was? What was the first thing they did? It was not to try and engage with or tackle this problem. They sacked 4,700 ATO workers. Oh, that's going to help! Let's just completely denude the very people that we need to work on this problem!</para>
<para>Then you have former Treasurer Joe Hockey's pledge to end the age of entitlement. Guess what? The age of entitlement was actually accelerated for the big corporates and multinationals. The research shows—and I alluded to this earlier—how many billions of dollars went begging. How many billions of dollars that should have gone to the Australian people through Australian government services went offshore? Does anyone know?</para>
<para>An honourable member: A lot.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KHALIL</name>
    <name.id>101351</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member here says, 'a lot'. I'll tell you, Deputy Speaker. The estimates are that around $600 billion in profits were shifted into tax havens just in that period of time. What do you reckon we could have done with that as a government and a nation to address inequality and the needs of the Australian community? We could have done quite a lot, actually. That's accurate. What they did when they were in government was to allow these multinationals to lean on the loopholes in our tax system while ordinary Australians were forced to lift the heavy burden. Your mum and dad small-business owner, your punter working at Woolies and paying their taxes, your salary earner, your wage earner—they were doing the heavy lifting while the big multinationals just flew like a dragon with their booty and their loots and deposited it over in their low-tax or no-tax haven on some island in the Caribbean. Those opposite stood by and watched that happen. No—they helped them. They facilitated it. They didn't care.</para>
<para>Despite the pitiful effort or lack of effort that was made by the coalition to take this problem seriously, actually do something about it and make a difference, it has taken us, the Albanese Labor government, to deliver on the international best practice to ensure a fairer and more transparent tax system. This legislation will be peer reviewed. Advice will be given to the OECD to ensure it is consistent with other jurisdictions to end that race to the bottom. Implementing this global minimum corporate tax will also allow the government to apply a top-up tax on large multinationals operating in Australia where their overseas income is taxed at lower than the 15 per cent rate. Implementing a domestic minimum tax complements the global minimum tax and ensures that Australia, rather than other jurisdictions, collects revenue from locals under taxation. By making multinationals pay a minimum effective tax rate of 15 per cent, the OECD estimates annual global revenue gains of over $300 billion. Australia, under the Albanese government, is joining other countries, like the UK, Canada, Japan, South Korea, the EU and other jurisdictions, in implementing this global minimum tax from 2024.</para>
<para>But that's just one part of Labor's larger plan when it comes to the tax system. The government has also delivered enhanced public scrutiny of tax information, which will give the parliament and the public better information about the amount of tax multinationals are paying in Australia. Providing that transparency is at the heart of our tax reform. Under this government, public companies listed and unlisted will now be required to disclose information on the number of their subsidiaries and their country of tax domicile. This will increase transparency on their corporate structures and on whether they are operating with opaque tax arrangements. We'll flush that out. It's about holding companies to account on their corporate structures. Some do the right thing, but for too long under the previous government, as I said, many of them made off with the booty to their low-tax or no-tax havens, and that's unacceptable.</para>
<para>The government has also introduced legislation to bolster country-by-country reporting to ensure deeper co-operation on an international issue and deliver greater accountability to those multinationals. In addition, the Albanese government has strengthened the funding for the ATO's Tax Avoidance Taskforce by $200 million a year over four years. This is another aspect of how the government's transparency agenda will deliver greater accountability, and it's backed up with real action and increased funding so the ATO has the resources it needs to deliver on the government's agenda.</para>
<para>Multilateral taxation coordination is not a phrase that usually makes it to the front pages of the paper, depending on your choice of reading, but it is an issue that I have been personally and professionally involved with for many, many years, because what was happening was fundamentally unfair. Billions of dollars could have gone to services for the Australian people, but they didn't because multinationals were not paying their fair share of tax. I worked on these policy issues and the great work that Jim Chalmers, the now Treasurer, and Andrew Leigh, then the shadow Assistant Treasurer, worked on when we were in opposition. We're delivering now in government. That's what governments do. They deliver and make a difference.</para>
<para>In this place, we care about the real-world implications of these policies. I know there are hardworking businesses in my community. Whether they're in Fawkner, Hadfield or Oak Park, a cafe owner who pays their fair share will know that there's going to be real transparency and accountability and that the multinationals will not get away with not paying their fair share. They work hard. They have put blood, sweat and tears into their small business or the work that they do, and it's about ensuring that they don't pick up the slack left by multinationals and their armies of accountants who shift profits to tax havens overseas. It's about ensuring fairness in the system. That's why this government is committed to being a leader on the international stage when it comes to multinational tax avoidance and minimum rates of global tax. That's what we're doing and we will not allow this issue to be kicked into the long grass.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr WEBSTER</name>
    <name.id>281688</name.id>
    <electorate>Mallee</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This package of multinational tax avoidance measures, the Taxation (Multinational—Global and Domestic Minimum Tax) Bill 2024 and related bills, is built on the world-class, world-first legislation that the coalition developed when we were in government, despite what the member for Wills says. For a long time, multinational companies avoided paying tax in some countries by using tax havens or favourable regimes, thereby depriving countries like Australia of much needed tax revenue. Today I will highlight some glaring examples of where multinational companies have ruined Australia businesses.</para>
<para>A rapidly growing share of shopping and trade now occurs through a multinational company's online platform or business. When a multinational company avoids paying their fair share of tax, Australian families and small businesses are forced to carry the burden. The coalition acted on this important initiative in 2014, when we found that existing laws were insufficient to address the cunning tax avoidance strategies multinational companies employ. During Australia's presidency of the G20 in 2014, the then coalition government introduced some of the strongest tax integrity rules in the world. The OECD's <inline font-style="italic">Action Plan on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting</inline> followed, and that's important, because a globally coordinated effort is required. Without it, multinational companies will shift their business or activity to tax havens or countries like the Cayman Islands.</para>
<para>Since 2021, more than 140 countries have signed an agreement, led by the OECD, to impose corporate tax of at least 15 per cent. The OECD estimates that, if everyone signed up, tax avoidance would reduce by 80 per cent worldwide. Identifying where companies earn their money is difficult in an increasingly online marketplace, particularly when it concerns the tech giants, whom I will focus on today.</para>
<para>Facebook, now called Meta, claim they pay 30 per cent corporate income tax; however, that's on what they report to be Australian revenue. Facebook paid just over $30 million tax in Australia in 2021-22, the most recently available reporting year. That's just 2.6 per cent of their Australian annual revenue of $1.15 billion in the last reporting year. They claim 91 per cent of their income was not taxable. Google earned $1.892 billion in Australian revenue but paid just $90 million in tax, an effective tax rate of 4.8 per cent. They claimed that 80 per cent of their revenue wasn't taxable. Microsoft was worse, earning $6.3 billion in revenue in Australia but claiming 93.6 per cent of its revenue was not taxable—'Nothing to see here!'—resulting in them paying just $120 million, or 1.9 per cent, effective tax on gross profits. Believe it or not, there is a worse offender: Apple, who earned $9.3 billion on Australian shores yet paid just $137.3 million in tax—which was only 1.5 per cent of their Australian revenues. Appallingly, in 2018 Netflix reportedly had an effective tax rate of 0.05 per cent in Australia despite $1 billion in revenue, paying just $342,000 in tax. That figure rose to $868,000 in 2022 but is still far short of its revenue and impact on Australian society. Netflix's tax avoidance smarts aren't limited to Australia; in the USA, during the life of the Trump administration, Netflix paid US$81 million in corporate tax despite earning $10.5 billion over that period. How do they get away with this?</para>
<para>Into that multinational tax avoidance mix comes this package of bills, to implement the global minimum 15 per cent tax in concert with the other 140 inclusive framework member countries as part of the two-pillar solution on multinational tax avoidance. The package has been delayed by some reluctance from the United States, from both the Obama and Trump administrations, because many of the targets of antiavoidance by multinational corporations have been some of America's biggest companies. The government estimates this package of bills will bring in just over $370 million over the five years to 2026-27.</para>
<para>I will focus, in this context, on the lack of social responsibility portrayed by the tech giants in our society and economy. First of all, there is a shocking level of scams through social media, Google and the internet. In my electorate of Mallee, constituents have come to me dismayed at being scammed; in fact, I've been scammed myself recently. While the government is taking some action in this area, I would like to see strong action to prevent vulnerable people from being exploited by scammers. On the weekend, Westpac accused Meta of failing to deal with the scam and fraud epidemic, raising 360 scam incidents from October to this month for Westpac customers alone. Executive Carolyn McCann urged Meta to review the way the Facebook platform is being used to scam ordinary Australians. The tech giants are also facilitating significant economic harm in our communities. Amazon, Google and Meta, through Facebook Marketplace, are becoming go-to destinations for people buying and selling new or second-hand goods. Meanwhile, local small businesses with retail leases are under huge pressure.</para>
<para>In the media space the tech giants have the ability to target Australians on their phones, which they look at 7.8 times an hour on average, according to <inline font-style="italic">T</inline><inline font-style="italic">ech </inline><inline font-style="italic">D</inline><inline font-style="italic">aily</inline>, which equates to about four to five hours a day spent looking at their phones. Data out this week shows teens are spending two hours a day looking at TikTok, an hour and a half on Snapchat and an hour on Google-owned YouTube, while children aged 10 to 12 spend 79 minutes a day on YouTube and 122 minutes, two hours, on TikTok.</para>
<para>Apart from these deeply disturbing statistics, the tech giants are also killing traditional forms of advertising. Streaming services like Netflix, which I mentioned earlier, have slashed free-to-air television viewership, forcing Australian television networks to speed up the rollout of their digital television on-demand services. Advertising revenue on Australian digital on-demand services is rising but not fast enough to keep up with the lost revenue on traditional free-to-air services. Teenage television viewership has reportedly fallen from 75 minutes a day in 2011 to just 13 minutes, according to Free TV. Live streaming is now 20 per cent of all free-to-air viewing, and that percentage is rising. Many new homes do not even bother installing an aerial.</para>
<para>I've given this subject a lot more thought recently because on 1 July Mildura suffered the indignity of, reportedly, the first shutdown of a digital television service in Australia. Former communications minister Stephen Conroy visited Mildura back in July 2010, hailing Mildura as the first place in Australia to switch on digital television. Of course, this was a positive spin put on switching off analogue television signals. Mildura is now arguably the first to lose digital signal.</para>
<para>Mildura has already lost its local television journalist and does not have a local television news bulletin. We used to have a healthy local journalism market. Now, all of our television news comes out of Melbourne or, if you're lucky, Ballarat or Bendigo. I cannot speak to a local WIN Network, Seven Network or Ten Network journalist with their camera. I've had to beam in via satellite on my own device. Without local journalists, TV networks just ignore local stories. Mildura people put up with the homogenised news from other parts of a very wide disconnected region due to the death of local journalism. Local radio and newspapers are struggling as well. As non-government broadcasters, they rely on advertising revenue. They are rapidly failing due to the tech giants monstering the advertising industry.</para>
<para>Lest anyone is thinking it, I will briefly mention that the ABC is not the solution here. The solution to market failure is not more government controlled journalism. Rather, it is to find ways to improve competition. Media competition is dying in regional Australia and the traditional Australian media. The tax-avoiding tech giants are silencing our local voices.</para>
<para>The coalition led the world, again, in government when we created a news bargaining code. But, under this government, the multinational digital platforms have refused to renew the deals. These deals, estimated to be worth $200 million per annum—a fraction of what these multinationals should be paying in tax in Australia—were to fund Australian journalism.</para>
<para>Australian media companies face all the other rising costs of doing business but compete on an unbalanced playing field against tech giants that pay nowhere near the 25 per cent corporate income tax for businesses with turnovers under $50 million or 30 per cent for businesses with higher turnovers. The coalition lowered corporate tax rates from 30 per cent for all businesses to 25 per cent. We wanted to lower it for all businesses but settled on lower taxes for businesses with turnover under $50 million. A lower corporate tax rate encourages investment and discourages the use of tax havens. Even the Minister for Industry and Science knows that.</para>
<para>According to the US Tax Foundation, the average corporate tax rate around the world is lower than ours at 23.45 per cent. It's 23.73 per cent in the OECD. In Asia, the average is 19.8 per cent, the lowest regional corporate tax rate in the world. There are only 20 jurisdictions in the world with a higher corporate tax rate than Australia's for companies with over $50 million in turnover per annum. It's little wonder that tech giants look for tax havens to escape our corporate tax. Let's not forget that these tax-avoiding tech giants are also failing our children and vulnerable people in the community by failing to take appropriate action against predators, scammers, sextortionists, pornography, and violent or extremist material online.</para>
<para>The coalition put forward the proposal for age verification online, but this government has been very slow to move towards a trial in this area. We know, from overseas examples, that age verification works. For reasons I'm outlining in this speech, the tax-avoiding tech giants' complaints about how hard age verification is should fall on deaf ears in Australia. The tech giants are acting in a socially irresponsible way in Australia and do not pay their fair share of tax, so they can lift their game on age verification.</para>
<para>I'm very concerned about the growing foreign influence of the tech giants because Australians are spending so many hours of the day on these tech giants' platforms with their thoughts being directed by foreign influences, not our own. Australians are shown political content from, say, the United States in precedence to Australia. I believe our political literacy in Australia is at an all-time low. Social media algorithms give users more of what they are already looking at or talking about, thanks to the corporate surveillance of your own phone, to reinforce existing biases. At least traditional media services once showed both sides of the story, giving you a diverse, informative news bulletin at six or seven o'clock to broaden your intellectual horizon.</para>
<para>It gets worse. We parliamentarians are expected to spend money on these tax-avoiding tech giant platforms, promoting what we have to say to ensure our voters are seeing it. Who profits from that? It's the same multinational tech giants that are paying less than five per cent effective tax in Australia. We are rewarding their conquest of the entertainment and news market by paying them to gain even more market share.</para>
<para>In conclusion, this bill builds on the coalition's world leadership of acting in the Australian national interest, and I believe the current government must do more. The tax-avoiding multinationals do not have Australia's best interests at heart, and we need the federal government to stand up to them.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHANDLER-MATHER</name>
    <name.id>300121</name.id>
    <electorate>Griffith</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>You would think, in the context of one of the worst housing and cost-of-living crises we have seen in generations, that everyone in this country would be doing it tough. But there is one group who are actually doing very well right now, and they are coal, oil, gas and other large multinational corporations, who are driving this cost-of-living and housing crisis with their massive price gouging and huge corporate superprofits.</para>
<para>We know that over 30 per cent of the entire Australian economy goes to the profits of big corporations. As a result of analysis of this cost-of-living crisis, we know that, over the last few years, Australia's 500 biggest companies made $98 billion in crisis profits. That includes Woolworths and NAB, one of the big four Australian banks. So, while you're paying more at the supermarket, getting price gouged; paying massive amounts on your mortgage; and being forced into vicious financial stress, some of Australia's largest corporations are getting away with massive corporate superprofits.</para>
<para>Why is this happening? In large part it's because those same corporations, whether it be Santos, Chevron or NAB and the three other big banks—who happen now to be represented, by the way, by former Labor premier Anna Bligh—wield enormous power over our political system on both sides of politics, both Labor and the Liberals. We know they both take millions of dollars in donations from those same corporations who benefit from incredibly favourable tax arrangements that, for instance, in one financial year, saw three out of five coal and gas corporations operating in this country pay zero dollars in tax—none. They're exporting our coal, oil and gas overseas. That means that $100 billion in income across 54 companies saw them pay zero dollars in tax. In fact, in the 10 years between 2014 and 2024, all the teachers in the country paid twice as much tax as the entire oil and gas sector. This is despite the fact that Australia is one of the largest exporters of fossil fuels in the world. We're in the top three—in the top three.</para>
<para>Despite that, we're in a situation where millions of people are living in poverty in this country, where you've got single mums choosing between feeding their kids and paying the rent, and where you have families coming to free meal programs because they can't afford to feed their family every night because they have to cover their mortgage that goes to one of the big four banks that records massive corporate profits. But the banks get away with paying very little tax on that, compared to the amount of income they make, which then means the government decides not to invest in the cost-of-living relief that those people need.</para>
<para>We know that, even if we just taxed our fossil fuel industry at the same rate as Norway tax their oil and gas industry, we would raise hundreds of billions of dollars more in income that we could put towards real cost-of-living relief. It's worth thinking about it in these terms: every time you have to skip seeing the dentist because you can't afford to pay, that's in part because governments will not properly tax our multinational corporations—one third of them get away with paying zero dollars in tax—or tax our oil and gas industry, and that means there's not the revenue there to bring dental and mental health into Medicare. Every time you're struggling to pay your student debt and it is weighing down on you and preventing you from getting a home loan, that's because this government, and both sides of politics, have decided they'd rather have large multinational corporations and coal, oil and gas corporations paying sometimes zero dollars in tax than provide you with relief, wipe your student debt and make university free.</para>
<para>If you're a pensioner or on income support, every time you're forced into poverty because the cost of living goes up faster than your income support payments, and you're forced to live on poverty payments—and, if you're a renter, cop massive rent increases that you can't cover—that's because both sides of politics, Labor and the Liberals, decide that they would rather multinational corporations and the big oil and gas corporations paid very little in tax, sometimes zero dollars in tax. It has been revealed, for instance, that when the government's latest gas tax was being drafted, in the room sat some of Australia's largest coal, oil and gas executives. You don't get to see ordinary working people sit in the room with senior officials and write tax policy, but you do get to see large multinational corporations and their executives have enormous influence over our political system.</para>
<para>Here is the bottom line. Australia is an incredibly wealthy country, but right now an overwhelming amount of that wealth and power is concentrated in the hands of a small few. If we did properly tax our coal, oil and gas industry, if we did properly tax multinational corporations, we could bring dental and mental health into Medicare, we could scrap HECS debt and make university free again, we could bring the pension and income supports above the poverty line, and we could invest in a government builder and developer that goes and builds hundreds of thousands of good-quality homes that are sold and rented at prices people can actually afford, just like this country used to do and like countries around the world do right now.</para>
<para>Politics is about choices, and right now both major parties have decided to choose poverty, immiseration and suffering, in some cases, with millions in poverty. They've decided to choose that over properly taxing multinational corporations. The reality is that the only way we're going to stop this is with a people-powered movement that wields more power over the major parties than the coal, oil and gas industry does over the political systems. We know that former Labor and Liberal MPs have gone on to work for, to lobby for, the coal, oil and gas industry. We know that the former Labor Premier Anna Bligh is now the head of the Australian Banking Association. We know the power these corporations wield. The only way we're going to push back is with a movement more powerful than them so Labor and the Liberal Party realise that people are sick of being taken for granted by a political establishment that far too often chooses to leave them in poverty and immiseration over taxing big multinational corporations.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SPENDER</name>
    <name.id>286042</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The tax system is the backbone of the Australian economy, supporting economic activity and funding government and essential services. But the tax system is not static; it needs frequent tinkering and occasional large-scale reform to ensure it is fit for purpose and meeting the objectives for which it serves society. This amendment, while likely to go unnoticed by many outside this building, is an important change. Economists estimate that the corporate tax lost from global profit-shifting has increased from 0.1 per cent of corporate tax revenues in the 1970s to 10 per cent in 2019. In Australia around one in three large public companies pay no tax in Australia, with revenue-shifting costing the budget around $5 billion each year. In an increasingly globalised world, it is essential that Australia is not robbed of its prosperity by multinationals using accounting tricks and low-tax jurisdictions to undermine our tax system.</para>
<para>The Taxation (Multinational—Global and Domestic Minimum Tax) Bill 2024 will implement pillar 2 of the OECD model rules to impose minimum tax rates of at least 15 per cent on multinational entities, as agreed by 139 countries back in 2021. It will create less incentive for profit-shifting and is expected to increase Australia's annual tax intake modestly. While this is an important piece of legislation, I want to take this opportunity to outline the importance of large-scale tax reform and the growing momentum for change that I am experiencing as I conduct community consultation for my tax green paper.</para>
<para>Over the past 18 months I have been speaking to economists, business leaders, environmental groups and the social and community sector about the need for tax reform. There is actually broadscale agreement about that need and that the tax system needs to be set up for the future. As Ken Henry has said in a number of cases, we are facing an intergenerational tragedy where young people today face the burden of paying for climate change adaptation and mitigation—climate change that has been caused by previous generations—and they are carrying the burden of hundreds of billions of dollars worth of debt and structural deficits as far as the eye can see and facing the burden of dealing with a tax system that is strongly targeted to income earners. At a time when the population is ageing and resources are going to our ageing population in particular, this is a real challenge for young workers who will, if we retain our current tax system, take on more and more of that burden.</para>
<para>At the same time, because we have a low productivity environment at the moment and because we're not building and innovating in our business environment as much as we need to be, we have another challenge in our tax system, which is significantly about those business challenges as well. Those are some of the reasons, certainly, why the economists, the people in the business community and the people in the environmental community care about tax. It's because they care about the long-term prosperity of our country, they care about intergenerational fairness and they care about ensuring that we are doing everything we can to make this transition as cheap, as effective and as quick as possible. Tax plays into that.</para>
<para>But it's not just the experts, the economists and the business groups who see this; the community sees this too. Over the past month I've been conducting an online survey of my constituents in Wentworth to try and understand what the community's views are on tax reform. Our office has been inundated with almost a thousand responses, and I have been impressed by the thoughtfulness and understanding of the tax system that is evidenced through the responses.</para>
<para>In my electorate, 75 per cent of respondents believe that tax reform is a high priority for the government. This percentage increases to 85 per cent for those between the ages of 25 and 34. Young people are caring about this issue. Related to the intentions of this piece of legislation, many respondents outlined their anger with the ability of large corporations and, particularly, multinational companies to shift profits, so I believe they would support the intent of this legislation.</para>
<para>But, interestingly, the issue with the highest overall share of responses related to ensuring that revenues from the extraction of Australia's mineral resources are taxed appropriately, particularly when the prices are high. This was followed closely by the need to address taxes that contribute to the unaffordability of housing. Among younger respondents, there is a strong sense that the tax system is broken for them, particularly around these two issues. They are appalled that activities that are harmful and destructive to Australia's natural environment seem to generate limited tax benefit for Australians. Megan said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… this country's resources belong to all of us and mining companies should be paying us to dig up the land, take them and export them.</para></quote>
<para>Similarly, younger people are frustrated by settings that make it easier for people to buy an investment property than for them to buy their own home. Relatedly, Valerie highlights the disparity between income sources, saying there shouldn't be 'additional benefit from investing in houses versus working for income', because many people, particularly in younger generations, don't have the capital to back them to buy a home. They are just working for income, and they are concerned about the tax system's balance in this regard.</para>
<para>But it's not just young people calling out for reform. Many older people in my electorate live comfortably and have benefited from a tax system that has allowed and encouraged them to accrue wealth through superannuation concessions or housing. They have worked hard—and I pay tribute to that; they have worked hard, innovated and contributed—but they are also worried about what our settings now mean for future generations. They're concerned that they've climbed the ladder but that they're pulling up the ladder behind them. Of people aged 55 or older, 75 per cent also believe that tax reform is a high priority, which is consistent with the whole sample. As Chris, a man in my electorate over the age of 65, said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Possibly the biggest problem Australia has the growing inequality, with housing being the best example … This will lead to fractures in the stability of our society.</para></quote>
<para>One final point I want to touch on from this survey is the surprisingly high focus on innovation. In company with topics such as climate change and housing affordability, I was glad to see that innovation and productivity also featured prominently, highlighting the community's frustration with the government's inaction in addressing Australia's flatlining productivity growth. As Susanne puts it:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The promotion of investment and innovation is great but what is provided in tax benefits to achieve outcomes? The only increase is bureaucracy and more forms to fill.</para></quote>
<para>While I appreciate that one electorate is not representative of the whole country, I think these results show that momentum is building for wider tax reform. Australians of all generations are increasingly seeing the connection between the challenges that they or their children face and that their grandchildren may face and the settings of the tax system. I welcome this bill and support the intentions of aligning global minimum tax rates to ensure that corporations pay their fair share of tax, regardless of where they're based. But more needs to be done urgently to address the other issues front of mind for Australians in which the tax system has an important role to play.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
    <electorate>Wannon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It is important that multinationals pay their fair share of tax. People and especially multinationals paying their fair share of tax means that we can deliver the services that we need. We need those services more and more, and we need government, especially the federal government, to provide the finances to the states for those services to be provided. I'll give you an example from my electorate. At the moment, we've just seen maternity services at the Camperdown Hospital cease. My hope is that they will resume as quickly as possible, but it's a classic example of this: if you're not getting the taxes you need, and if you're not then providing the services you need, then services will be withdrawn. We're seeing more and more that pressures through the cost of living and the cost of doing business come onto the budget. Especially in Victoria, we're seeing health services cut, and we cannot have health services cut, especially in my electorate and especially when it comes to maternity services like those in Camperdown. Let's hope those services can be reinstated as quickly as possible. It is so important that services are delivered, and the way you deliver services is by making sure you have equitable taxation.</para>
<para>As we've seen with multinationals over a period of time, there have been real concerns about whether we are getting multinationals paying their fair share of tax. That's why, when the coalition were in government, we started a process of making sure that multinationals would be taxed fairly. As the Deputy Speaker and everyone in this chamber knows, that was incredibly important work. What we're seeing from the government is a continuation of that process, including the OECD two-pillar solution to multinational tax avoidance. We obviously support that work, because we want to make sure that multinationals are paying their fair share. As I illustrated in the example before, if we're not getting everyone to pay their fair share, then pressure comes onto government to provide the services that they need.</para>
<para>We remember that, before the last election, the Labor Party said the only thing they would look to do with regard to raising taxes was when it came to multinationals. It's been two years since the election, and now we see them beginning to do something on this for the first time. Why it has taken them two years is beyond me, but that seems to be the glacial pace at which this government works on anything. They also said, 'That's all we are going to do when it comes to taxation.' And yet, once again, what we've seen is a failure to honour their word and commitment. Let me give you some examples of this. They said, 'Our focus will be on multinationals.' But what have they done as well as target multinationals? They've raised taxes on superannuation. 'We'll have no new taxes. We won't do anything.' But they raised taxes on superannuation. Then came a real doozy. They decided that they would tax unrealised capital gains. How that is going to work is, I think, beyond anyone. How the government could even introduce such a policy and then think it would be workable is just crazy.</para>
<para>I'll give the example of a farmer in my electorate. They might have seen their land value go up over the last three or four years. All of a sudden, because of what's happening with agricultural prices, that land value might have started to go down. How is this going to work when you're trying to tax unrealised capital gains? If the land value had gone up, they might have had to sell some property to pay the unrealised capital gain. Then, all of a sudden, the price goes down. How is that going to work in this wonderful system that the government is putting in place? Obviously, we're going to have to see the detail at some stage and, as we know, especially when it comes to the Prime Minister, they're not very good at detail, so who knows what is going to happen when it comes to that wonderful new area of taxation that they've put in place.</para>
<para>Then there are the increases on franking credits. They said they weren't going to do anything on franking credits, but then we see that, by stealth, they've introduced taxes on franking credits. Of course, they've ended the small business tax concessions, and they've decimated the instant asset write-off relied on by Australian small businesses. Here we were, with the government saying, 'No taxing. No taxing. We're only going to do it to multinationals.' Then, all of a sudden, what we have is new taxes.</para>
<para>Government members interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>And those opposite start arcing up. Of course, they can't arc up and say, 'No. We didn't do it.' They arc up and say, 'Oh, well, even though we said we weren't going to introduce new taxes and the fact is that we have introduced new taxes, there's nothing to see here.'</para>
<para>The Australian people are waking up to the government, and they're waking up in a cold sweat because all they're seeing from the government is that they're making the cost of your life in every area more expensive. They're taxing you where they can, they're adding to your cost of living where they can and they're adding to your cost of doing business where they can. It is cost, cost, cost, and there are no solutions whatsoever, especially when it comes to the cost of living. It's getting to the stage now where schools are having to feed children. It's getting to the stage now where small businesses are saying to me in my electorate, 'It's never been this bad. The Asian financial crisis and the GFC had nothing on what we're dealing with now.'</para>
<para>And people are waking up. They know. When it comes to wages, their real wages have gone down. When they go to the supermarket, they can buy about a quarter or a third less than they used to be able to buy. They get that realisation every single time they turn up to the supermarket. What is happening to their wages and its real capacity to purchase things is writ large for them there. I say to the government: enough with taxing; it is not what people need right now. If you can, start on the cost of living, deal with inflation, deal with the cost of doing business. That is what your key focus should be.</para>
<para>While we welcome the continuation of the work that we were doing in government when it comes to multinationals and making sure they pay their fair share—</para>
<para><inline font-style="italic">A government member interjecting</inline>—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I just hear an interjection and I've got to take it. Someone on the other side said, 'Oh, you've been asleep at the wheel.' We actually introduced this. You've taken two years to produce this. You haven't only been asleep at the wheel; you rolled your sleeping bag out, put some earmuffs on and went into a coma for two years.</para>
<para>Government members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>You've done nothing for two years. You've been in government for two years, and you've just introduced this. These are extraordinary interjections from those opposite. I would just focus on doing your job: making life easier for the Australian people and, especially, fixing the cost of living and the cost of doing business—and you don't do that with new taxes.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr LEIGH</name>
    <name.id>BU8</name.id>
    <electorate>Fenner</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>First, I'd like to thank all members who have contributed to the debate. Together this package of bills will enact a 15 per cent global minimum tax and domestic minimum tax for multinational enterprises operating in Australia with an annual global revenue of 750 million euros—which is approximately A$1.2 billion—or greater. These bills, upon receiving royal assent, will apply to fiscal years commencing on or after 1 January 2024. Large multinational enterprises with operations in Australia may therefore face a top-up tax liability under these taxes from this date if their effective tax rate is less than 15 per cent.</para>
<para>These bills represent a landmark achievement in the international tax landscape and follow on from the government's 2023-24 budget announcement that we would implement global and domestic minimum taxes for large multinational enterprises. Their introduction also marks further progress on the government's election commitment to support pillar 2 of the OECD/G20 two-pillar solution to addressing the tax challenges arising from the digitalisation of the economy. It also builds on the government's Multinational Tax Integrity Package to help ensure multinational enterprises pay their fair share of tax.</para>
<para>Not only does this legislation place Australia alongside other lead jurisdictions, as part of a global effort to prevent a race to the bottom on corporate tax rates, but it also offers Australia some important domestic benefits. Putting a floor on corporate income tax rates will reduce the incentive for multinational enterprises to shift profits away from Australia to low-tax jurisdictions. This will in turn improve the competitiveness of smaller domestic businesses by reducing such tax advantages available to multinational enterprises. Avoiding a race to the bottom on corporate taxes will also support investment in Australia, given our relatively high headline corporate tax rate and the relatively large share of revenue that Australia draws from corporate taxation.</para>
<para>Importantly, implementing these taxes, especially a domestic minimum tax, and having the package of bills apply from 1 January 2024 will ensure that Australia retains first claim to additional taxing rights on any low-tax domestic income, thereby protecting our revenue base. It is important to note, though, that the first global and domestic minimum tax returns will not be due until 30 June 2026, giving multinational enterprises time to adapt their compliance and reporting systems.</para>
<para>Finally, these bills will not affect Australia's existing corporate income tax rate or rules, nor Australia's existing taxation integrity measures, all of which will continue to apply to multinational enterprises operating in Australia, ensuring the integrity of our tax system.</para>
<para>In closing, I want to acknowledge the many officials that have worked on this extremely complicated package of reforms: in the International Tax Branch—Kerry Baguley, William Potts, Henry Addison, Lilian Yan, Mackenzie Brown, Brian McKay and Mingliang Sun; from Law Division—Tania Koit, Monica Lee, Maddison Bell, Jodic Chan, Kelly Minerds, Ron Harry, Diana Batchelor, Rumbie Mawrie, Istiak Ahmed and Janelle Hanns; from the Office of Parliamentary Counsel—Daniel Lovric, Matthew Sait, Eric Armstrong and Jonathan Phua; and from the Australian Taxation Office—Adam Peel, Touqir Ali, Adam Reed, Alexandra McCallum, Angus Brackenreg, Brendan Wagner, Bruce Matheson, Caroline Arman, Katina Gregory, Lakshinee Kodituwakku, Louise Andolfatto, Marcus Wong, Melissa Papazzo, Michael Sapuppo, Michael Wang, Nola Bi, Paul Skellett, Rhys Manley, Simon Hellmers and Tim Smith. I commend these bills to the House.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>230886</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this the honourable member for Hume has moved as an amendment that all words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. The immediate question is that the amendment be agreed to.</para>
<para>Question unresolved.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>230886</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>As it is necessary to resolve this question to enable further questions to be considered in relation to this bill, in accordance with standing order 195 the bill will be returned to the House for further consideration.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation (Multinational—Global and Domestic Minimum Tax) Imposition Bill 2024</title>
          <page.no>127</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="r7221" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Taxation (Multinational—Global and Domestic Minimum Tax) Imposition Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>127</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Treasury Laws Amendment (Multinational—Global and Domestic Minimum Tax) (Consequential) Bill 2024</title>
          <page.no>127</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="r7222" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Treasury Laws Amendment (Multinational—Global and Domestic Minimum Tax) (Consequential) Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>127</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Better and Fairer Schools (Information Management) Bill 2024</title>
          <page.no>127</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="r7232" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Better and Fairer Schools (Information Management) Bill 2024</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>127</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr STEVENS</name>
    <name.id>176304</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Better and Fairer Schools (Information Management) Bill 2024. I commend the contributions made by the lead speaker for the government in the House and the Manager of Opposition Business, who outlined that in principle we are supportive of what this bill purports to achieve. There are a couple of concerns, though, that I will touch on.</para>
<para>This bill extends the unique student identifier to the schools sector—this is something that already applies to people in the university and VET sector—and will essentially link together the records management and tracking of students to earlier stages in their education, being those in the school sector. The principle of that is not objectionable. The main point I address is something that is going to be an ever-ongoing tension in bills like this that we consider going forward, as technology in the digital world gives government the ability to create efficiencies with data. We need to balance that, and we in the coalition are very concerned about ensuring we're balancing that, with ever-increasing protections of people's privacy, and make sure that we don't accidentally, from piece of legislation to piece of legislation, head down a path where there is a dangerous amount of information on individuals that's not properly protected and the privacy of those individuals is not protected.</para>
<para>As the Manager of Opposition Business mentioned in the House, we're very anxious to see what the government's progress is in reviewing the Privacy Act, which has been reviewed periodically—it dates back to originally being passed in the late eighties; I think it was 1988, from memory. It's vitally important, when we talk about legislation like this—which we're not opposed to—that's putting another way for government to collect information on the Australian people, that, whilst there are arguments of efficiency for government each time these bills come through, we make sure we're reflecting on and increasing the protections for people's privacy and people's data as government has a growing capability of bringing together multiple data points on people's various interactions with government. We shouldn't have to delve into the merit of and the need for the protection of the privacy of our citizens from the misuse of that data.</para>
<para>I think of myself, and I have—and most people are probably the same—a Medicare number, a drivers licence number, a tax file number. I think the Electoral Commission has some kind of number on us all when we're on the electoral roll. If you access support through Services Australia, there are—as we all know as members of parliament—the client numbers that Centrelink use, and there are all the other different ways in which government collects information on people.</para>
<para>We don't have, and we should never have, some kind of central ID-type requirement in our society, where all the information that the government knows about you is centrally placed, under one umbrella. It's important that information on people is kept only where it needs to be and not inappropriately shared and that there is a strong legislative framework in place to make sure that there is not a risk that—without the knowledge of parliament, in particular, and the people therefore—government is inappropriately bringing all this data together to do things with it that are not appropriately consented to by the people of Australia, through the parliament.</para>
<para>I'm not alleging at all that this bill is some kind of surreptitious attempt to do that. It's obviously the expansion of an existing scheme and existing principles that were legislated when we were last in government. The Student Identifiers Act was legislated when we were in government. This is expanding the people captured by it. We're not concerned by the principle of that, but we've made the important point that we just want to keep front of mind that, with bills that relate to the way in which we collect information on the Australian people, we've got to, as we expand the way we do that, also expand the protections and the safeguards that are in place to make sure that the ever-increasing amount of data that is being stored on people is in no way open to abuse.</para>
<para>Every time new schemes come in, there is always a risk that some unforeseen or unintended consequence could come of that. So we would welcome the minister, in summing up on this bill, maybe just giving us some kind of elaboration on where the government is at with the Privacy Act and reflecting on the fact that this is another example of a new record-keeping statute that could justify reflecting on how the Privacy Act and other protections that are in place, via the Information Commissioner et cetera, are appropriately fit for purpose in the modern era, with the way in which we collect data on the Australian people.</para>
<para>Having made those comments—I intended to be brief—I'll conclude and commend this bill to the House. While we're passing this, I seek and hope for some update from the government on where they're at with considering, reviewing and improving the frameworks in place to protect information that we keep on people.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RYAN</name>
    <name.id>249224</name.id>
    <electorate>Lalor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm pleased to hear that those opposite will be supporting the Better and Fairer Schools (Information Management) Bill 2024. It is something that is long overdue, that has been a long time coming. I speak from a long time ago, when I was in classrooms and was a principal, calling for a student identifier at a state level and then supporting in this place, in 2014, the use of a unique student identifier across states, a national system. It was sorely needed in schools when I was working in them.</para>
<para>Let me go into the reasons why a unique student identifier was important. As someone working in a school in the government sector and working with local principals, across sectors, it was incredibly difficult in the transition period between grade 6 and year 7, when families would enrol students into schools, and then we'd get past Australia Day, 27 January would come and we'd get to the first day of school. The way the school system works is that schools are audited on student attendance and student enrolment. There are a couple of points across the first three months of the year where, if a student hasn't presented at a school or appeared there on day one of school, their enrolment can be open to question.</para>
<para>For particularly vulnerable children, that transition period between grade 6 and year 7 is absolutely critical. I saw figures back then where, potentially, there were 30 children between grade 6 and year 7 who failed to transition to high school in my community—30 students who just never showed up at high school. Without a unique student identifier, we couldn't say definitively that they hadn't enrolled, because they could have enrolled in a school in the other sector. They could have enrolled in a Catholic school, even though they'd put an enrolment into the state sector. We didn't have a system to check this, other than having relationships with other schools.</para>
<para>I could ring the local Catholic schools, the other Christian schools or the local Islamic school and ask if they had enrolled a particular child. Even when I had done those calls and could clearly say to an auditor looking at my school numbers, 'This child has not enrolled in the other sectors locally, but we are still pursuing the family. We're still knocking on their door. We're doing home visits to their last known address to try and get this transition happening,' I could be told by an auditor, 'They've probably moved to Melton.' What does 'probably' mean? We're talking about an 11-year-old child whose future is on the line in the first 30 days of high school.</para>
<para>We know what happens if that transition doesn't happen. That child then becomes an intermittent learner, somebody who can completely fall through the cracks. They can get to the end of year 7 and not have attended a day of school. That's a failed transition. They become a statistic as a failed transition.</para>
<para>So the unique student identifier in Victoria was a critical initiative that meant that we could sleep at night, knowing that we knew where each child was—that they were enrolled in a school. Although they may not have taken up the enrolment in my school, I knew that they were in another school and that another principal, another year-level coordinator and another welfare team were taking up the management of that child, which was critically important when we knew that that child was coming from a vulnerable background. It's equally important, in an era where people take children across state lines to avoid detection, that we know where those children are.</para>
<para>We need to know that our systems are actually working together to ensure that every child is getting the guaranteed education that is legislated in this country. This is one more way of putting that layer in place to ensure that those who are working in the system to make sure every child is educated have the supports, the processes and the systems they need. Because we can use this data, de-identified, researchers can tell us how many failed transitions there are—how many children did not show up for school this year—and we can do so without it being a guess. We will actually know and be able to set up processes to find those families and to support those families to make sure that the children do make that transition.</para>
<para>Education is compulsory, but when it's compulsory can vary from state to state. In Victoria, it's compulsory to 17. You are either to be in school or pursuing further training. You have to seek permission outside of that system to be employed full time. Those permissions aren't that difficult to get, but there's a process so that we know where children are, that they are continuing to be in education or training and that they haven't fallen by the wayside—so that the funding that we're putting into schools is going to the places we need it to go and so that we can capture the students that are vulnerable in terms of their attendance or in terms of their completion.</para>
<para>I absolutely support this bill and hope that the negotiations continue around the use of the unique identifier, that what they can be used for and what they can't be used for is sensible and that privacy is protected in the process. But the de-identification of that data can be useful for the systems we have in place—because there's an assumption: we have schools, school's compulsory and, therefore, students are attending. It's not always the case, particularly in vulnerable communities. Vulnerable students become more vulnerable at any transition point. Changing schools is a transition point where students become vulnerable. Even if there's a change of schools because of a family move, young people are vulnerable at that point to becoming what we term a 'school refuser', someone who is uncomfortable and therefore reluctant, and needs supports wrapped around them to keep them attending.</para>
<para>With the best will, schools can't do this work without systemic support. The unique identifier is something that I support and that I think will be of real value in communities like mine where we were given data that suggested that 30 kids had failed to transition. That's a lot of young people. That's a lot of kids not getting across to year 7 who then become vulnerable in so many ways. In communities where that kind of vulnerability exists and those failed transitions occur, we know what the end result is. The end result can often be a transition into the legal system and a transition into incarceration.</para>
<para>There are a lot of compelling reasons why this is a good idea. I wanted to make a contribution today to make sure that my colleagues understand what my compelling reasons are. I believe they override fears around privacy, although I still think that the ongoing negotiations between the state ministers and the federal government will see sensible provisions put in place to protect privacy. More importantly, when it was initially decided that these reforms were a good idea—it's a decision that's been bipartisan all the way through—the fears were mostly around this age group, around the school unique identifier. I commend everyone in this place to support the unique identifier and the way it will support teachers, schools, and families. Ultimately, it will support young people in their school journeys.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELYEA</name>
    <name.id>309484</name.id>
    <electorate>Dunkley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm very pleased to be speaking on the Better and Fairer Schools (Information Management) Bill 2024. This bill has been a long time coming. My colleague and friend the member for Lalor has been advocating for these reforms since 2009. She was a principal in schools in Victoria, and I appreciate the example she's recently shared of why this bill is so important and her advocacy on the need for a unique student identifier.</para>
<para>The bill may sound a little bland, but this is a really important issue to address. It centres around the unique student identifier that our students have. Essentially, the USI is a reference number made up of 10 numbers and letters. Basically, if you are a new or continuing student undertaking a nationally recognised or state qualification, a student in the Commonwealth, you need a USI.</para>
<para>I'll start with a little history about the bill. Back in 2009, before it was dissolved, the Council of Australian Governments—COAG—set out to create a national unique identifier that could be used to track students as they progressed through education and training. This was important for the higher education and vocational education and training, or VET, experience of students. While good progress was made on the USI for VET and higher education, it has taken until now for it to be extended to school students.</para>
<para>With this bill, we will be expanding the USI system from VET and higher education to primary school students. Students will have a unique identifier that they will take with them throughout their education journey, not just through higher education as is the status quo. Secondary and primary school students will have one as well. It actually boggles the mind why this was not done in the first place. Anyway, it's the last national policy initiative to be delivered under the current schools agreement.</para>
<para>What does this bill do? The bill itself is very simple. It makes the necessary technical changes. But I digress. It will allow the Student Identifiers Registrar, a statutory body under the Student Identifiers Act 2014, to assign school identifiers. Then, in turn, the schools will apply for school identifiers on behalf of their students. It will also empower the registrar to assign, validate and revoke student identifiers. It authorises the registrar to use or disclose information for research purposes that meet requirements set by all education ministers. Importantly, it will give the Minister for Education the necessary authority to recommend to the Governor-General the making of regulations under the act. The next steps on how to harness the potential of the schools USI system will be a matter for discussion between the Commonwealth, states and territories, and it is subject to agreement at the education ministers meeting.</para>
<para>Most importantly, what this bill will do is ensure that we can keep an eye on our children and young people who are vulnerable, so we know they are at school or when they move, because participating in school and other education is an important safety net for the most vulnerable young people. Getting an education is a protective factor that enables children and young people to break the cycle of poverty and disadvantage.</para>
<para>Privacy of information, as we all know so well, is incredibly important. This bill will protect privacy. There is nothing more important than safeguarding information about our children and teenagers. There are strong privacy protections in the bill. The bill introduces the concept of protected information into the act, which includes student identifiers, schools identifiers and school identity management information. The information is subject to strict legislative restrictions on the collection, use and disclosure of information. Information collected by the registrar is subject to the Privacy Act 1988. State and territory privacy legislation will also apply to schools identifier information. Education ministers have agreed to allow a student's schools identifier to travel with them when they move from one school, from one school system or from one jurisdiction to another, supporting the robust and timely transfer of a student's information as they move from one school to another.</para>
<para>There are some future uses that could be considered for this bill. One is helping ensure that students are not falling through the cracks, by supporting jurisdictions to monitor when they leave one school and don't enrol in another. There are future opportunities to connect the USI to NAPLAN so that parents and teachers can have ready access to the progress of their children over time. This information will be at their fingertips. Building our understanding of student pathways means we can better target and provide support to students and schools. Having a USI will enable more sophisticated data linkage and analysis to improve our understanding of student growth, progression and pathways. All future uses of the schools USI need to be agreed to by all education ministers through discussion.</para>
<para>The bill is backed by major reviews. The schools USI has had the backing of major reviews: the Review to Achieve Educational Excellence in Australian Schools, the Productivity Commission inquiry into education and the Education Council's STEM Partnerships Forum. These reports made the case that the USI is needed to drive consistency in data collection; to maximise learning growth, supporting the individual learning needs of students; to underpin innovation and continuous improvement; to improve our understanding of student pathways into school and beyond; and to track individual student performance.</para>
<para>This is the last national policy initiative to be delivered under the current schools agreement originally signed under the former government. I urge the coalition to continue its commitment to this policy and ensure that this bill enjoys bipartisan support.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CLARE</name>
    <name.id>HWL</name.id>
    <electorate>Blaxland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank members for their contribution to this debate. The Better and Fairer Schools (Information Management) Bill 2024 will amend the Student Identifiers Act 2014 to extend the system of national unique student identifiers to the school sector. A unique student identifier in the schooling context will be called a schools identifier, and it will allow school students across the country to have a single identifier which will travel with them throughout their education—from school to higher education and vocational education and training.</para>
<para>The bill meets the Commonwealth's obligations under the current National School Reform Agreement to get schools identifiers underway, and it's an initiative which has long enjoyed bipartisan support and has been a long time coming. It was first agreed at COAG under the Rudd government in 2009 and then included a decade later in the National School Reform Agreement struck by the former coalition government. It has now, finally, been delivered by this government in this bill.</para>
<para>The bill sets up the architecture for school identifiers to be issued to school students through the existing Office of the Student Identifiers Registrar, but the practical use cases for the schools identifiers will be for agreement between me and my state and territory ministerial colleagues through the education ministers meetings. No use case will be implemented without the agreement of all education ministers. This is an important governance safeguard, and it is backed by robust privacy protections designed to ensure that any data collected is secure and used only for approved purposes. It's very important that we have privacy at the centre of this to ensure that we protect students whilst they benefit from the opportunities a streamlined and unified identifier system offers.</para>
<para>Once again, I thank members for their contributions, and I commend the bill to the House.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a second time.</para>
<para>Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced.</para>
<para>Ordered that this bill be reported to the House without amendment.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>CONDOLENCES</title>
        <page.no>131</page.no>
        <type>CONDOLENCES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Pritchard, Mr Thomas Page</title>
          <page.no>131</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
    <electorate>Riverina</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I wear the poppy pin in respect, remembrance and, indeed, awe. Today we gather again to pay tribute to Thomas Page Pritchard. We should respect him, we do remember him, and we are in awe of him. I look across the chamber and see the member for Spence, and I honour his service, too, as a private with the Army Reserve. I acknowledge all members in the federal parliament who have served our great nation and who have worn a uniform, because they are the best of the best and they are the bravest of the brave.</para>
<para>The one we pay special tribute to today, Thomas Page Pritchard, was a Rat of Tobruk. Indeed, he was the last of the Rats of Tobruk. During the North African campaign in World War II, Nazi propaganda radio broadcasts spoke—supposedly contemptuously—of the Tobruk defenders, labelling them as rats. In true Aussie Army fashion, they took that as a badge of honour. In defiance, the soldiers proudly adopted the nickname. In fact, during the siege they designed their own medals in the shape of a rat, made from the scrap metal of a downed German aeroplane. You've got to love Australians. You've got to love our soldiers. You've got to love those in the Australian defence forces.</para>
<para>I noted with interest last week that, when the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition began their tributes, the parliamentary speeches in relation to our fallen hero, neither of them mentioned in their very eloquent remarks Thomas Page Pritchard's age. There's probably a good reason for that—no-one's quite sure whether he was 102 or 103. Let's go with 103. It was said that he was born in Portland, Victoria, on 25 May 1921. But he was a man who lied about his age—he said it was 1919—so that he could serve. He lied about his age so that he could line up with his friends, his comrades, to serve our nation.</para>
<para>These days, some men lie about their gender so they can compete in women's sport. This was the finest generation of men, of brave souls, who went to serve their nation in times of peril—enormous peril. None of them knew if they were ever going to return home and to the loving arms of family and friends, yet many of them went to war and laid down their lives for their friends and for their nation.</para>
<para>Just the other day I attended a war remembrance service in Wagga Wagga—home of the soldier, Kapooka's Blamey Barracks. A veteran, a digger, came up to me, and he said, 'This was the greatest generation.' He was referring to those from World War II who are still living and those who, sadly, have gone to their eternal rest, and he was right, because they were the greatest generation.</para>
<para>The Siege of Tobruk in 1941—what a campaign! Australians fought in land and air campaigns in Egypt and Libya in North Africa. They were up against forces led by German field marshal Erwin Rommel. They had great respect for Rommel and his Afrika Korps. It was a vital campaign in World War II. The defenders at Tobruk—our men, our heroes—had to adjust to life in stifling heat. Some of them were quite used to it, given the fact that they'd been in Australian summers, but this was a heat that was intense.</para>
<para>They were under constant artillery and air bombardment. Supplies of food and water were limited. The troops were plagued by flies, fleas and illness, and many of them—those who knew their history—would've been well aware of a campaign a little further south, the Second Boer War of 1899 to 1902, where more men died of disease than bullets. But spirits remained high, as they always do, because that's Australian soldiers. That is the spirit of the khaki, which stretches from the Boer War and Gallipoli right through the world wars, Vietnam, Malaya, Korea, Afghanistan and all the other campaigns.</para>
<para>We train the best of the best in my hometown, and we're very proud of that. We're very proud of being a garrison town, and Tom Pritchard's loss has been felt keenly at Kapooka, because they know and understand that he was an iconic figure. Because of his death, a link in that heritage had been severed.</para>
<para>Mr Pritchard was also well aware of the responsibility that he had shouldered, probably unwantedly, as the lone known surviving Australian Rat. In 2020, his dying mate and fellow Tobruk veteran, Alf Jackson, who was 101, asked him to carry the torch for those who had passed on. Alf knew that he wasn't long for this world, and he said, 'Can you do that for me, cobber?' and Mr Prichard said that he would try.</para>
<para>Those who knew him described him as a quiet and thoughtful man. Like many World War II veterans, he didn't like to talk of battles past, battles won and sufferings endured, but he and his mates helped win the war against the Germans and the Axis powers. He and his mates are responsible for the fact that we now can live free and that we now have a democracy that we should be proud of and should at all times uphold.</para>
<para>We live in very troubled times. We've got Ukraine, we've got the situation in the Middle East, and many Australians would perhaps not be so keen to don a uniform and defend our country. But it's the ideals that Mr Pritchard had in spades that we should try to live up to at all times. We should remember him and all others—the 103,000 names on the Australian War Memorial Roll of Honour, just down the road. We should remember them not just on 25 April, Anzac Day, and not just on 11 November, Remembrance Day and Armistice Day, but every day because we owe so much to them. We should always remember. Thank you, Mr Pritchard. Lest we forget.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURNELL</name>
    <name.id>300129</name.id>
    <electorate>Spence</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Firstly, I acknowledge the very fine words from the member for Riverina. I wouldn't expect anything else, given that the fine member was the defence personnel and veterans' affairs minister for some time and also had Kapooka as his garrison town—a place I have fond memories of. I expect nothing less; thank you for those fine words.</para>
<para>I too rise to pay my respects to the late Thomas Page Pritchard, the last living Rat of Tobruk, and I thank him for his service. I acknowledge all current and former Australian personnel as well; thank you for your service. I extend my deepest sympathies to his family in their time of bereavement.</para>
<para>Tom's passing on 3 August 2024 marks the physical end of one of the most distinguished groups of servicemen in our national history. The Rats of Tobruk, their name an iconic embrace of insults hurled by the Nazi propagandists during the Second World War, symbolise the very essence of the Australian spirit, bringing to the world through their actions an unbreakable resilience in the face of the toughest of conditions but immersed in our unique humour; they could only be Australians.</para>
<para>Tom's own story is typical of the Rats. He enlisted underage, like many young Australians at the outbreak of conflict across the world, to serve with a distinction and honour reserved for the most experienced of men but complete with a wicked sense of humour and sense of wit; that is echoing just some of the testaments of those who served and lived with Tom. He lived a remarkable life, like all Australians and our allies who fought in Tobruk for the betterment of our nation both then and now. Tom was also an incredibly modest person and did not want a fuss to be made about him being the last living Rat of Tobruk. In paying my respects to him and expressing my condolences to his loved ones, I respect those wishes and leave his personal story there.</para>
<para>Regarding the Rats of Tobruk: their collective story warrants significant respect and commemoration, and I will pay tribute to them as a whole. Tom and the 14,000 Australian brothers in arms, alongside thousands of their allied comrades, would defend the port city of Tobruk for over seven months. With backs to the ocean—although their wit would remain as dry as the deserts of Libya—this garrison would deny and defy the Nazi war machine that was besieging them, despite extreme external pressure and a significant lack of supply. This garrison would suffer nearly 4,000 casualties, most of whom were Australian. The Australian War Memorial states that 832 Australians from the 9th Division were killed during the siege.</para>
<para>The Rats of Tobruk are extraordinary, having given their lives to bear the toughest of conditions in the interest of our nation to serve as a significant part in the defence of democracy and freedom against the very real danger of dictatorship and tyranny. It's important to remember not just the sacrifice of the Rats but that these were just everyday Australians doing incredible things—everyday Australians like my great-uncle, Lyle Sidney Taylor, another Rat of Tobruk, who passed in 1972 before I was born. I remember my father speaking of his service with immense pride on a regular basis. You can find Lyle's name on the roll of honour in the Curlwaa Memorial Hall, ensuring his service is recognised through generations, alongside dozens of others who served from 1939 to 1945. It is important he is remembered like all the Rats of Tobruk, like all serving men and women throughout history, and collectively we do so. We do so in memorials like that on Anzac Parade, just over the way here in Canberra, and the tributes along the Northern Expressway in Adelaide, and in ceremonies on Anzac Day and on anniversaries commemorating fateful days where Australians would take up arms, and in our schools as we learn the national story as children.</para>
<para>We do this because the sacrifice of our service men and women from across our nation, wherever they may have been in the world in the past, helps give context to our values, our culture and the present; and because their experiences in serving our country have helped to forge the traits and qualities that we pride ourselves on today: things like Australian mateship and humour, Australian resilience and the unbreakable spirit of our people. In remembering our service men and women, and recognising the conscious decision an Aussie makes to commit themselves to defend our way of life, Australia traces a thread upon which the nation was spun and continues that story into the future.</para>
<para>The Rats of Tobruk, in the words they have written in the Australian story, likewise left an inspiring and enduring page in that book, underscoring by their actions the courage, comradeship and sheer determination of the Australian people, lighting the torch that Australians today will continue to pass on for generations to come. So while Tom Pritchard's passing is a significant loss for Australia, his life and the lives of the Rats of Tobruk will live on for as long as the Australian spirit itself. Thank you, Thomas Page Prichard, for your service. Rest in peace.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELL</name>
    <name.id>282981</name.id>
    <electorate>Moncrieff</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Spence for his words and I invite him, if he has time, to stay for my contribution here as I will be talking about constituents from his electorate. It is with no doubt the biggest honour of an MP's life, and, indeed, of my life, to stand here in this place to speak about some of the heroes of World War II, those brave soldiers who faced the enemy in the Siege of Tobruk from 11 April to 10 December 1941—eight months of brutal fighting.</para>
<para>I start by paying tribute to the last Rat of Tobruk to pass, Thomas Page Pritchard. I extend my condolences to his family and pay tribute to his service to his country and to the Commonwealth. On the honour roll, which I looked up, he is listed as Tom, a driver, born 24 August 1921, which is not the same as what the member for Riverina just outlined, but I did look it up on the honour roll. VX23441 was his number, and he was in the 2nd/5th Field Ambulance unit. That would make him 103, if he were indeed alive today. Tom's service helped to preserve our freedom and rights as we enjoy them in a democratic nation today. We must continue to remember those who fought so bravely for us. I humbly thank him for his sacrifices and for those of all service men and women, past, present and into the future. I highlight those serving men and women at the Kokoda Barracks in Canungra, close to my electorate on the Gold Coast, and those of the 5th/11th Battery 9th Regiment Royal Australia Artillery, and B company 25th/49th Battalion, Royal Queensland Regiment, at Ashmore, in my electorate.</para>
<para>It was also the service and sacrifices of two brothers from Broken Hill—Hergott Springs, to be precise, which is now known as Marree, off the Oodnadatta Track in South Australia—that I would like to highlight for the house and for the history books. Colin Arthur, SX5015, born 26 September 1919, was 22; and Maurice Geoffery, SX5014, born 31 August 1921, was just 20. There was just two years between those two boys. Both privates served, unusually, in the same battalion, in the 2nd/43rd. They fought side-by-side to save each other and to save their families from the enemy. They fought for our democracy. They fought so we didn't have to. They fought with courage.</para>
<para>Colin and Maurice both returned from the war, but with injuries they lived with for the rest of our lives. Colin moved to Western Australia and was badly affected by the war. He isolated himself from the family unit until his passing, of which there are no details. The honour roll says he's still alive, actually! But, if he were, he would be 105 years old, and Tom Pritchard would not be the last to pass. So that scenario is fairly unlikely.</para>
<para>Here is a vignette from Elizabeth about Colin's younger brother, Maurice—here's where it gets hard—in South Australia. Circa 1975, a small girl sat on her old uncle Mott's knee, giggled about the hard lumps in his gnarled fingers and wondered innocently why he had a glass eye. He always smiled, and he never talked of the horrors of war, especially to children. But his family knew that he was the only soldier in Tobruk to step on an antipersonnel mine and survive to tell the tale. He lost an eye, and his legs were badly damaged in the blast. Not just his hands but his body too were riddled with shrapnel. That young, innocent girl was seven-year-old me. My grandmother, Doreen Marion Bell, after whom I am named, was born 16 March 1916, and she died on 13 August 2012, aged 96 years. Her much loved baby brothers, Maurice and Colin, both survived and both served together. They returned from Tobruk to marry and to have their own families.</para>
<para>To close, I want to thank driver Tom Pritchard for his service to our nation, to those who returned and, sadly, to those who never had the chance to start their own families. To all of the Rats of Tobruk and to the Bell brothers from Hergott Springs, thank you. On behalf of my dearly beloved grandmother, Doreen Marion—Colin and Mott's older sister—my father, Roger, his two brothers, Trevor and Ian, and my wider family, we will remember them. Lest we forget.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>201906</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>As quorum is not present, the Federation Chamber is now suspended. It'll be resumed once quorum is present.</para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 12:27 to 12:36</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
    <electorate>Wannon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It is a great honour to stand here and to remember Tom Pritchard, a Rat of Tobruk. I say that incredibly sincerely because I've had the great honour to go to Tobruk and to see where our Rats of Tobruk served. It's obviously a desolate spot in Libya. It is a port, but it's the smallest of ports, and there is nothing around it. It is desert, and where our Rats of Tobruk fought there are a couple of trees. There is no protection. There is no shelter. The way that they dug themselves in and fought on our behalf is something that I think is truly, truly remarkable. When you go there, it's hard to see the strategic importance that it had at the time, but it was seen as having immense strategic importance, and that is why they dug in and that is why they are legends of our country.</para>
<para>Tom himself was born in Portland in my electorate, and so there is a significant attachment to the electorate of Wannon when it comes to Tom's life. Also, he worked in Hamilton in my electorate. He was an SES employee and he worked in Hamilton for a period of time. I don't know this, but I can only imagine that he probably knew the other Rats of Tobruk from the electorate of Wannon. Jack Caple, who, sadly, passed away a few years ago, was another great Rat of Tobruk, whom I had the great honour of knowing, and I discussed with him what it was like to fight and serve at Tobruk. Having been there myself, I asked him questions about what they thought about defending the terrain there at Tobruk. When we went to Tobruk, we held a commemorative service at the war graves at Tobruk. It was extraordinarily moving. There is one thing that has never let me—and this is where the Commonwealth War Graves people need our utmost respect, and it was local Libyans who did it on their behalf. The way that those war graves are respected and are kept is exemplary and a true tribute to everyone. It's incredibly important that we always remember those who have served on our behalf and that we continue to remember them in the most dignified way for their service.</para>
<para>It was a great honour over the weekend to have Sir Peter Cosgrove and Lady Lynne Cosgrove visit the electorate of Wannon on Sunday, when they came to Warrnambool. Sir Peter is the most highly decorated officer ever to come to Warrnambool, and it was wonderful to have him. The community really appreciated his visit. He came to the local Legacy and spoke there, and he was able to thank those wonderful legatees for the work they do right across the electorate of Wannon. He then went to the cadets. We've got Navy, Army and Air Force cadets, and they were able to assemble and parade in front of him. It was wonderful to see these young cadets all doing their bit, many of them wanting to go on and serve their nation into the future, parading in front of him. They loved having him there, and it was great to see.</para>
<para>Then together we did the Vietnam veteran's commemorative event. As everyone knows, it was Vietnam Veterans' Day on Sunday, so we had a very moving commemorative event at the Warrnambool RSL. Sir Peter was able to lay a wreath. Then some of our Vietnam veterans gave a guest speech on what it was like in Vietnam during the war, and we were able to remember the service of Air Commodore Peter Raw. Air Commodore Peter Frank Raw was a senior officer and pilot in the Royal Australian Air Force. He saw combat in a heavy bomber unit in the European theatre during the later stages of World War II and was a senior officer in Vietnam, serving in many flying, training and administrative roles. The way that his role in particular in Vietnam was able to be laid out was incredibly important. I've got to say, it was great information to everyone who was there.</para>
<para>Just to give you a sense of the record of Air Commodore Peter Raw, he was a companion of the Distinguished Service Order, Distinguished Flying Cross, Air Force Cross, 1939-1945 Star, Africa Star, Defence War Medal 1939-1945, Australian Service Medal 1939-1945, Australian Active Service Medal 1945-1975 with the clasps 'VIETNAM' and 'SE ASIA', Vietnam Medal, Queen Elizabeth II's Silver Jubilee Medal 1977, Defence Force Service Medal with first, second, third and fourth clasps, National Medal with first and second clasps, Australian Defence Medal, Cross of Valour from Poland, Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal and Warsaw Uprising Cross.</para>
<para>The way he served our nation was extraordinary. I say to Peter's wife: you should be rest assured that Peter's service at all times was exemplary, that he did his best and that he always tried to do the best by his nation. To our Vietnam veterans in Warrnambool and right across South-West Victoria, thank you for what you continue to do to commemorate the service of all those who fought in Vietnam. I end where I started. It is so important that we remember those who have served for us and do it in the most dignified and respectful way.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JOYCE</name>
    <name.id>e5d</name.id>
    <electorate>New England</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today as the shadow minister for veterans' affairs to speak about Tom Pritchard, who was one of many but the last of all the Rats of Tobruk. I think it's important to start with why Tobruk was important. Tobruk held a port. Holding that port meant that the delivery of resupplies had to come from Tripoli. Erwin Rommel, whose Afrika Korps was dominating the fight in North Africa, had a garrison of around about 12,000 or 14,000 that was holding their spot, and overwhelmingly they were Australians. If they lost it, then they wouldn't have to take the supplies from Tripoli; they could get supplies in from Tobruk. Holding it meant that Rommel had to take supplies from the Italians—they were fading a bit then—1,500 kilometres away. It was a bit like holding Brisbane and, because you hold Brisbane, the enemy having to resupply from Adelaide, so it was very important that they held out—not only from Adelaide; you'd have to be moving supplies from Adelaide across the desert. This gives you a sense of the importance of this. It was made up of the 9th Division and one from the 7th Division, and the brigades were the 20th, the 24th and the 26th. From the 7th Division it was the 15th. It talks about the period that went from 8 April to 25 October, but the final relief of the garrison didn't happen until December. I think it was the 2nd/13th Battalion that had to stay there until the final relief.</para>
<para>We know that during the day there was searing heat and that during the night it was freezing cold. There were real issues in trying to get fresh water up to them. There were dietary requirements. We also lost naval ships going in there. It was under siege. The Luftwaffe were bombing the naval vessels. We had Rommel in front of them and the Luftwaffe behind them, so this was really savage. It was during that period from April to October that 749 people were killed and 1,996 were injured. Of course, more were killed outside that period—it was about 832 for the whole of the process to the end of the sieges in December.</para>
<para>There was relief of the garrison in October, because—and I'm sure the Labor Party members are very aware of this—there was a move to make sure that we went back to the protection of Australia. That was incredibly important as well, and I think that was very wise move because our issues were closer to home, with the Japanese making their way down through the peninsula and, of course, into Papua New Guinea—Papua New Guinea being a protectorate of Australia. They were on land administered by Australia. I think it's very important we say that, because people say, 'The Japanese wouldn't have got to Australia,' but they did. They were bombing Darwin, bombing Broome and bombing Townsville, and they were on what was then the Australian protectorate of Papua New Guinea. They weren't wasting lives because there was no purpose to it. Once they got the port of Port Moresby, we were in real strife.</para>
<para>Why is that important? These people, after they'd finished with Tobruk, went to Papua New Guinea, and that's where Tom Pritchard went. Tom Pritchard, after he did his time as a medic in Tobruk, then had to go to Papua New Guinea. He went from the desert to the jungle. He got malaria twice. So, apart from being shot at and being bombed, he was also dealing with the afflictions of the diseases in these areas. People often lose sight of that. It's not just the enemy; it's the environment that can cause so many problems. If you've had malaria twice, it's not good for your health forevermore. It's a wonder he made it to the age he did.</para>
<para>What do we take from all this? The biggest thing about these people—and I think it's remarkable—is the sacrifice. Tom Pritchard put his age down wrong to go to war. I think his mates had gone off, and he wanted to be with them. His mother wasn't too happy about it, and that's often the case. My grandfather went off to war when he was 16. I've seen photos of him; he looks 16.</para>
<para>The issue is that these people, when they went off, had all the reasons to stay at home. They were young. They would have liked playing sport. They would have enjoyed life. They would have enjoyed time with their mates. They might have had a girlfriend, and the older ones might have had a wife. They had all the reasons to stay at home and all the reasons not to go, but they went. Why did they go? There are a range of reasons, but the core reason was that they were worried about Australia. They were worried about what would happen to our nation, and they had to do something about it. Inside their own hearts, they said, 'I'm going to do something about it; I'm going to make the sacrifice.' After they did all that, you'd think they would have come home and said: 'That'll do me. I have filled my book of service to this nation. I'm now over it.'</para>
<para>Tom Pritchard was a classic example. He came back and worked for the SES. He actually came back and continued on in the service for the nation. I saw that with a gentleman by the name of Gordon Phelps, to use an example, in St George every morning. He was in New Guinea as well, so it's pertinent to this. Every morning, before sunrise, he'd take his sheepdog, and he'd go down to the foreshore at St George. He'd walk on the path with a stick with a spike at the end of it and pick up the papers; he'd pick up the rubbish. I used to say to him: 'Why do you do that. You're an old man.' He would go, 'I love this country.' He would never have a go at people who dropped the papers. He just decided that he was going to get up every morning and pick them up. He was also in Rotary. When I looked at him, I just thought, 'It's just a life of service.' He offered his life and put his life on the line. Then he got home and just never stopped. That was apart from bringing up his family and looking after his grandkids. He never ever said: 'I want to get an Australia Day award' or anything like that. He said: 'It's my own business. I do it. I do it quietly and that's just the way it is.'</para>
<para>What Tom Pritchard and Gordon Phelps would say to us is, I believe: 'What type of people are you? Would you do it?' If the problems arose again, would people say, 'I'm off to North Africa' or 'I'm off to Papua New Guinea'? Would they do it, basically, without question? When they came home, would they just go back to work? Would they just say: 'I've done my bit. I'm back to work'? Are we as tough as them? Are we as resilient as them?</para>
<para>Unfortunately, circumstances have made it that—we live in a very special time, the people in this room. Your children and your grandkids are going to live in a different time because the world has changed. Totalitarianism, which Tom Pritchard was up against—the evilness of fascism and a regime that believed in destroying a race of people who were enslaved. It was not just the Jews but also the Gypsies. They believed the Slavic people were second-class citizens, and they just starved them in the prisoner of war camps. They threw them a couple of potatoes and watched the fun as they clawed over them like impoverished and famished people. This was the regime we were up against. It was bad. It was very bad; it was an evil regime.</para>
<para>My father was in the services during the Second World War; he got smashed up. My grandfather fought. They wouldn't even let you draw a swastika; it was just not allowed in the house. They absolutely, 100 per cent, held them in contempt. It was serious. There were certain things you were just not allowed to say in the house. What I can say about them—even about my father, who has passed away now—is that they had a real steel about them. They really disliked what they called 'malingerers', people who feigned an injury, who weren't quite perfect so therefore thought that they were afflicted. My dad was smashed up; his leg was mangled up. They just worked. They went to work and believed that your duty continued on—duty to your family and duty to your nation—and you muscled through. They would always say, ever since I was a young age—in a polite way, in a firm way and in a funny sort of quasi-compassionate way: 'You've got to suck it up, mate. Suck up your lemons and get going. Get through it.'</para>
<para>So the question for us when we look at Tom Pritchard, one of many but the last of all, is: have we still got that steel? Have we got it? Because we're going to need it. Do we instil that in our children and our grandchildren? Do we say to them: 'If you're really hurt, we've really got to look after you. But if you're only a little bit hurt, you've just got to deal with it. You've just got to deal with it and get through.'</para>
<para>We have now, again, the unfortunate rise of totalitarianism. It's there again. You've got unilateral control by a regime in the north which, once more, has incarcerated a little over a million people from the Uighur nation. It's just taking over areas.</para>
<para>What Tom Pritchard says to us right now—and I think it's important, on his passing—is that we have got to get that toughness back into us. We really have to, because, if we don't, we're going to lose this country. People think it'll just stay there. It won't. Read your history books. Things don't just stay there. If you're not tough enough, you lose them. So every parent has a responsibility, when their kid goes out on the soccer field, the footy field or the netball court, to say: 'You've got to muscle through this. You've got to deal with it.'</para>
<para>I want to give great thanks for the work of Tom Pritchard, the life of Tom Pritchard and the service of Tom Pritchard, but not just Tom alone. He was emblematic of all those 14,000 soldiers in the garrison of Tobruk and those who then went on to fight once more in Papua New Guinea, for the protection of our sacred land that we love so much. Tom makes us say, first and foremost, 'Thank you for everything you did.' It makes us respect the fact that they really didn't ask much for it. They just did it, and then they came home and went back to work. Most importantly, it says to us, if you're going to show any sort of respect for them, if you have it, the biggest thing you must never do is forget they did it. If you forget they did it, then you believe they did it for nothing, they did it for free. You believe that their life, their sacrifice, their marriages breaking up, those who were killed, those families who were decimated, those people who came back and their mind wasn't in the square it was when they went away, those careers that were just left behind, those who came back and were just lost, who died back in civilian life and ended up in an unmarked grave—you believe they did it for nothing, that we were entitled to them doing it, that we had an entitlement. We have no entitlement. We have a debt—no entitlement, a debt. That's why, for Tom Pritchard, we say, 'Thank you very much,' and, for all the others, we say, 'Lest we forget.'</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>201906</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I understand it is the wish of honourable members to signify at this stage their respect and sympathy by rising in their places.</para>
<para class="italic"><inline font-style="italic">Honourable members having stood in their places—</inline></para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PAYNE</name>
    <name.id>144732</name.id>
    <electorate>Canberra</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That further proceedings be conducted in the House.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 12:58 to 16:00</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS</title>
        <page.no>137</page.no>
        <type>MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability</title>
          <page.no>137</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MILLER-FROST</name>
    <name.id>296272</name.id>
    <electorate>Boothby</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability was an enormous undertaking of 4½ years and an important and vital piece of work. Almost 10,000 people shared their experiences through almost 8,000 submissions and 32 public hearings, and the evidence was shocking.</para>
<para>In Adelaide, we've had some shocking, well-known cases where people have died in terrible situations. One particularly well-known and horrific case, which made the media and resulted in convictions, is every person with disability's nightmare and every family's and carer's nightmare. Her family had set her up well. She had a trust fund. She had a home that was owned freehold. Yet, following the death of her parents, she was neglected by paid providers. She was literally left to rot in a chair in her living room, unable to get to the toilet or feed herself. Her money and her possessions, including jewellery, were stolen from her, and she died an horrific death.</para>
<para>As a carer, as a parent, as someone who has a caring responsibility for a person with a disability, as someone who gets around in the disability sector, I can tell you that our biggest fear is that, despite every effort to uphold the dignity, the rights and the safety of people with disability, this could happen. So I'd really like to thank the 10,000 people who told their stories and shared their experience, their knowledge and their ideas. Sadly but necessarily, they also shared their experiences of violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation. This was hard to hear, but it's vital information. Lived-experience evidence is the most important. It ground-truths the other evidence. So hearing from all those people—people with disability, their carers, their families, their advocates—has informed the 222 recommendations that range from safety and human rights to inclusion and access to mainstream services like health and education.</para>
<para>The recommendations cover multiple portfolios and all levels of government. Of these recommendations, 172 are the sole or joint responsibility of the Commonwealth. Of these, 130 have been accepted or accepted in principle. 'Accepted in principle' means the policy intent of the recommendation has been accepted, and I want to reassure the disability community that we have heard them and we have listened. We are taking action and we are committed to driving real change across all aspects of society. We are committed to the vision, set out in the royal commission report, of a future:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… where people with disability live free from violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation; where human rights are protected; and individuals live with dignity, equality and respect and can fulfil their potential … where people with and without disability:</para></quote>
<list>live, learn, work, play, create and engage together in safe and diverse communities</list>
<list>have the power of choice, independence and the dignity to take risks</list>
<list>make significant contributions to communities that value their presence and treat them with respect</list>
<list>are culturally safe and belong in families, communities and peer networks.</list>
<para>The response to the royal commission is a joint response of all Commonwealth, state and territory governments. It provides a clear commitment that all levels of government are working together and that we will work in partnership with people with disability to determine the most appropriate and impactful way to implement reform in response to the recommendations. There are 36 recommendations that require further consideration because they relate to ongoing or recently concluded inquiries or negotiation, or require further consideration in consultation with people with disability. There are six recommendations that are noted, and there are a further 50 that fall entirely within the responsibility of state or territory governments—so a response will need to come from those governments.</para>
<para>As a federal government, we will continue to be accountable for the progress of those recommendations that are our joint or sole responsibility through six-monthly reporting on the implementation progress. However, as a government, we have not waited for the final report of the disability royal commission to take action to improve the lives of Australians with disability. Our $371 million commitment towards the first phase of the response to the disability royal commission builds on over $3 billion over the last three budgets to improve the lives and safety of people with disability in Australia. We are taking action through the four key pillars that reflect the areas the disability community told us are important to them—better safeguarding, promoting inclusion and accessibility, upholding human rights and recognising the unique perspectives and experiences of First Nations people with disability.</para>
<para>Implementing and embedding our shared vision for an inclusive Australia requires a sustained national effort from all Australian governments. This Australian government commits to strengthening safeguards, independent oversight and complaint mechanisms. We commit to listening to the diverse voices of people with disability and working in partnership to design, implement and evaluate policies and programs that drive reform. We commit to upholding the human rights of people with disability to enable them to live with dignity, equality and respect. And this Australian government commits to promoting a more inclusive society where people with disability feel they belong so that they are respected, valued and able to fully contribute.</para>
<para>Our focus is on fixing problems, but not just that; our focus is also on creating a better future where people with disability are valued, respected and supported to live their lives with dignity.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>COMMITTEES</title>
        <page.no>138</page.no>
        <type>COMMITTEES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Climate Change, Energy, Environment and Water Committee</title>
          <page.no>138</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report</title>
            <page.no>138</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr GILLESPIE</name>
    <name.id>72184</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Plastic pollution in Australia's oceans and waterways was the issue of our very extensive inquiry. The report is titled <inline font-style="italic">Drowning in waste</inline> for a very good reason—because at the moment we have a problem with waste in Australia. We have put a ban in place, but we have a disrupted and incomplete circular economy for plastic waste in this country, and waste is building up everywhere. But the good news is that we've made some recommendations which will, hopefully, fix a lot of those problems.</para>
<para>First of all, I thank every one of the hundreds of submitters for the very extensive submissions that were presented to the committee as we went around Australia. There are an enormous amount of community organisations and philanthropic organisations and some standout councils and state and local government organisations that are on the job. But there's much more to do. I also thank the secretariat of the committee, who managed huge volumes of information and submissions and put them into a coherent set of data. There was so much information, so to distil it all down was quite an amazing bit of work. I thank all the other committee members, and our chair, the member for Makin, who steered us through a very useful inquiry.</para>
<para>What I'd like to do is not give a holistic, blow-by-blow description of this excellent report but talk about the things that I think are the most important and will lead to the most dramatic improvement in preventing plastic waste polluting our oceans and waterways. There is the microplastic issue, which is the small amounts of plastics that are ubiquitous in metropolitan life getting into our food chain, through fish and other marine animals, and there is the macro, or large, plastic waste, which is suffocating sea animals like whales, dolphins, turtles et cetera. Some of the microplastics and larger plastics are getting into seafood.</para>
<para>I should acknowledge all the good things that have happened because of the National Plastics Plan. I would just like to give a shout-out and a nod to my former colleague the former member for Brisbane Trevor Evans, who led that legislation when he was the minister with that responsibility in the Morrison government. He addressed a lot of the problems with the whole life cycle of marine plastic and waterway plastic and the issue of how to reduce it. Many people pointed out that there are gaps in our current National Plastics Plan. The first is to do with putting a value on the plastic. It's only waste if you waste it. You can apply that principle to lots of things. But plastic is not waste. It has embedded energy in it, and we need to start using that. I'll expand on that a bit further. A lot of the depositions related to the fact that we have plastics that are easy to recycle and plastics that are hard to recycle. They accentuated that we need to get the plastics that are essential in our lives—PET, high-density polyethylene, low-density polyethylene and polypropylene—because clever industrial chemists can put that to the best use. The more complex polymers are harder to recycle.</para>
<para>By virtue of the Recycling and Waste Reduction Act—which the former member for Brisbane Trevor Evans and Scott Morrison were influential in putting in place—the Recycling Modernisation Fund and the National Product Stewardship Investment Fund have been set up and have led to major changes, some of which involve people who made depositions to this inquiry. But we still have a fragmented market. The ban is in place, so we can't export it, but there are not enough entities involved in reprocessing the built-up plastic that we are now banning from being exported. People are turning to fresh, virgin plastic in new presentations rather than utilising this market.</para>
<para>There were recommendations for microfibre filters on every washing machine. That was back in the original National Plastics Plan. But we haven't enacted that, so we need to do that. As I mentioned, some councils are already doing really good things with stormwater filters at that macro, local council level. But many more things can be done in that same vein, making it uniform or mandatory across the country.</para>
<para>There is the Ghost Nets Initiative. The big nets and bits of plastic that are left over from commercial fishing are a big problem, particularly because they suffocate whales, dolphins, turtles—all sorts of stuff. There is a ranger program to address that. A lot of the areas in the north of Australia are really quite affected by this, because a lot of these plastics don't actually come from Australia but they can end up in the northern part of Australia. One of the recommendations that would address this would be recommendation 3, which is that the government prioritise a sustainable end market for recovered plastics and increase the disposal options for plastics in remote and regional Australia, because a lot of these plastics initiatives are metropolitan based.</para>
<para>My particular interest out of this committee is to get recommendation 12 up. Rather than banning plastics, the best way for them not to end up as waste is to get value out of them. Many other countries have addressed this by turning waste into energy either by simple incineration or by chemical processes. The feedstock is the end-of-life plastic, and it goes through chemical processes, providing energy itself, and then, with refining, you can turn plastics that would have ended up in a waste pile, or in landfill, in a river or out at sea, back into what it started as—high-purity diesel, gas and even petroleum and kerosene. The engineering does exist for that. Many places in Europe have waste-to-energy plants in the middle of their cities, but they're in hills or dressed up with vegetation or elaborate architecture, and people don't even know that it's an energy plant using the city's waste.</para>
<para>So there are many things that we could do. But we really need to get going with putting a value on plastic waste for everyone in their home. We have so many clothes that are made of synthetic material. The waste can be filtered out at the place it's developed, and we can do that by setting standards for white goods manufacturers. We can encourage states at COAG meetings to institute filters on all stormwater drains, depending on the state.</para>
<para>I commend this report to the House. It is a very good report. It's got a huge amount of useful information. Again, I'd like to thank all the committee, all my colleagues, and all those people that are active in the industry of preventing waste from polluting our oceans. But we really need to engage with our Asian and near north neighbours to see if we can get the same rigour applied to their metropolitan and regional practices, particularly in the fishing industry, where a lot of these plastics really have a high impact on marine life. I commend <inline font-style="italic">Drowning </inline><inline font-style="italic">in waste</inline> to the parliament.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STEGGALL</name>
    <name.id>175696</name.id>
    <electorate>Warringah</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I welcome the opportunity to discuss this very important review. I first want to thank the committee, and the secretariat staff, who I know worked very hard to bring it all together. We had a number of public hearings and a significant number of submissions, and we also did a number of in-person visits around the country. It was incredibly instructive to see the submissions by so many in that process.</para>
<para>I would also like to thank some organisations in Warringah that are doing a fantastic job of addressing the problems of plastics and microplastics. Of course, Warringah is a place with many waterways. We have Manly Dam, we have many harbour coves and inlets and then we have beaches. So we can see firsthand the impact that plastics and microplastics have on our water environment and waterways. And, as this report identifies, we are drowning in waste.</para>
<para>I would like to start by thanking some organisations, like AUSMAP, who made submissions and gave evidence to the inquiry but also started one of their programs in Warringah, around East Esplanade in Manly. It's a program where they monitor how much plastic and microplastic they find in that area. It is citizen science. It is volunteer based, and they turn up on a very regular basis to monitor that plastic content. Operation Straw and Pittwater Eco Adventures are doing a phenomenal job, on a very regular basis, of cleaning up some of those harbour beaches. Unfortunately, maybe differently to surf beaches, the harbour beaches accumulate a huge amount of rubbish and plastics that have come off the boats and recreational activities in our harbour.</para>
<para>As this report has identified, plastic is everywhere. It's overrunning our streets, parks, beaches and coastlines. This report, appropriately titled <inline font-style="italic">Drowning in waste</inline>, lays out quite plainly that we need to take action. Australians consume more single-use plastic per person than any other country in the world, bar Singapore. I know a lot of Australians think that we're doing well. We think we're good global citizens and we think we're quite engaged with recycling and being plastic aware. But this statistic shows we are not doing as well as we think. I repeat: except for Singapore, we consume the most single-use plastic per person. Clearly, we have to do better.</para>
<para>In 2020-21 Australia used 3.79 million tonnes of plastic, of which only 14 per cent was recycled. So we are huge contributors to this problem. Around 130,000 tonnes of plastic leaks into the environment annually, including into our oceans and waterways. There are currently 150 million tonnes of plastic pollution in the ocean. By 2040 global plastic pollution is expected to double, with the ocean's plastic pollution expected to more than quadruple. By 2050 the amount of plastic waste in the environment could increase to 26 billion tonnes if no action is taken. And it gets worse. The breakdown of plastics into microplastics poses further risk to marine life, leads to blockages in digestive systems, malnutrition and death. It really is no surprise that many are so concerned. Plastic pollution is a global crisis, and it's harming our environment, our wildlife and, ultimately, us. There isn't much data yet showing the impact on human life of the ingestion of plastic, but the ingestion is happening.</para>
<para>Key facts, as highlighted in the report, are that we have a massive issue. There's a huge problem that we must act on because we are, quite literally, drowning in plastic. The key recommendation of this report is for the National Plastics Plan to be updated. In particular, the report notes that the plan should:</para>
<list>contain reporting and transparency measures to monitor progress and accountability among all stakeholders and be based on an overarching circular economy strategy.</list>
<list>be developed with stakeholders to promote sustainable practices and recycling, and responsible waste management, as well as developing transition plans.</list>
<para>This is incredibly urgent. Our current National Plastics Plan is a disjointed one, with some goals included in the original plan already achieved prior to the plan's development. It begs the question: what is it really achieving? Stakeholders told our committee that they were lukewarm, at best, about the current plan, and so a new plan must urgently be developed in consultation with state and territory governments, industry and community and be coordinated nationally to prioritise industry accountability.</para>
<para>Most importantly, though, I feel strongly that what we need is for the responsibility around plastics to shift back to manufacturers. The committee found that manufacturers find it cheaper and easier to use virgin polymers rather than recycled materials in plastic products, which means we are continually making the problem worse. We are adding more and more and more plastic to the system. This use of virgin polymers for new plastics is a problem. Virgin polymers are manufactured using unrecycled and previously unused materials. It's ultimately oil. This is big oil wanting to maintain the addiction to plastic so that we continue to use their product. But technology has moved on. We know we can use much more recycled content, so that must be the direction we go in.</para>
<para>We had submissions to the committee from people who believe the federal government should implement a tax or levy that specifically targets virgin plastic to discourage its use and promote the use of recycled materials. Whilst the committee recommended investigating a levy on the use of virgin polymers, it fell short of recommending that it be mandatory. We've been waiting for this for a long time. We have had voluntary industry codes. I believe that time is up. We've had decades of lacklustre action from manufacturers and industry, and it's time for them to have their house in order.</para>
<para>The government should be implementing mandates for minimum recycled content in any imported plastics and mandating limits on the number of polymer variations—to put it in layman's terms, the number of variations to the recipes or to the types of plastics that are manufactured. Unfortunately there's a difficulty in establishing a good recycling industry. The more variations of polymers and types of plastics we have, the harder it is to establish proper recycling supply chains and circular economy aspects for all the different types. If you limit the number of them you can facilitate a much higher level of recycling, which is incredibly important.</para>
<para>Microplastics are the much tinier pellets and smaller pieces of plastic. They are more insidious and they get into more areas. Essentially, they are small pieces of plastic less than five millimetres long, and they are found in all parts of our environment, all over the globe. They have even made it into the polar regions and into foods such as sea salt and beer. They're everywhere. Studies around the world are showing that microplastics carry harmful chemicals and toxins, but we're still learning the full extent to which microplastics may be harmful. This is a reminder that, while technology creates progress, it can sometimes take us backwards. There was a lot of concern raised about artificial turf on sports playing fields and the plastic rubber that is used in playground equipment. For all of those uses of plastic, we do not require adequate protection for the drainage around them. Small particles leak into the environment, and that creates a huge amount of microplastic in the surrounding areas.</para>
<para>The recommendations in this report address a number of important issues, and I hope that the government does take note. We also saw the efforts of Indigenous communities and First Nations Australians in reducing plastics in our environment. We have a lot of expertise and, I think, a huge amount of willingness. Every school I visit in Warringah does Plastic Free Wednesday, where there's a focus by young people on limiting the use of plastic. But, clearly, we need to sheet it back home to manufacturers, who are still producing too much plastic and putting too much into the system.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KENNEDY</name>
    <name.id>267506</name.id>
    <electorate>Cook</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>First, I'd like to acknowledge the member for Bass and the rest of the committee for the great work they've done. I was not a part of it, but it's a topic that's very close to my heart. It's also close to the hearts of a lot of people in my electorate of Cook.</para>
<para>Much of Australia's way of life is built around the water. Eighty-seven per cent of Australians live around the water. The electorate of Cook has the Pacific Ocean to the east, the Georges River to the north and the Hacking River to the south. Our country is surrounded by the Pacific, Southern and Indian oceans. Water is a huge part of our identity as Australians. It's also a huge part of the identities of people who live in my electorate and enjoy these waterways.</para>
<para>Plastic pollution is threatening the enjoyment of Australians and people in my electorate. It's also threatening biodiversity and human health. It's a significant, growing issue. There is currently 150 million metric tonnes of pollution in the ocean. According to the Australian Marine Conservation Society, based on current trends, there will be more plastic than fish in our oceans by 2050. Three-quarters of the pollution on Australia's coastline is made up of plastics, which account for about 80 per cent of all marine debris. It's a huge threat to biodiversity. There is entanglement in abandoned, discarded or lost fishing gear, known as ghost nets. Plastic bags, ropes, clothing and sixpack rings are some of the other most common items to injure sea turtles, marine mammals, seabirds, whales, sea lions and others. When this marine life ingests plastics, it can block the digestive system, causing a long and slow death from starvation.</para>
<para>Chemical additives leach into the air, water and soil, and much of this is toxic to animals. And, yes, it can be toxic to humans as well. These toxic additives that are absorbed can accumulate in the food chain and pass from fish to humans. A particularly intractable problem in plastics are things such as BPAs, flame retardants and heavy metals. The presence of these materials in recycled plastics limits their use in consumer products with high potential for human exposure, such as food packaging. Higher up in the food chain, when ingested by humans, microplastics can damage cells in the human body, leading to serious health impacts. There have been academic studies linking microplastics to cancers, lung diseases and birth defects. During use and disposal, plastics release microplastic and nanoplastic fragments along with thousands of toxic chemicals, including additives and residual monomers into the environment and into people. Plastic additive chemicals can disrupt endocrine functions, and studies have linked them to premature births, neurodevelopmental disorders, male reproductive birth defects, infertility, obesity, cardiovascular disease, renal disease and even cancers. These need to be investigated more, but there is increasingly mounting evidence. It's particularly hazardous for children. Exposures are being linked with pregnant mothers as well as a lot of other different things, like cancers. Early life exposure to plastics is actually being linked to increased risk of noncommunicable diseases, such as heart disease, type 2 diabetes and obesity in children across the human lifespan.</para>
<para>We have a big problem. That's what that tells us. There is a big, emerging problem, and we need to reduce, reuse and recycle. They're the three traditional levers you have in plastic management. These strategies have proven highly effective for paper, cardboard, glass and aluminium but have largely failed when it comes to plastic. Plastic recovery and recycling rates are below 10 per cent globally. Ninety per cent of plastics are not reduced, reused or recycled. They are actually disposed of into our ecosystems. Australia ranks 15th in the world for generation of single-use plastics. That's absolutely terrible for a country of our standing and where we care about the environment and our population. In 2018, we released national packaging targets. The idea is that, by 2025, 100 per cent of packaging would be reusable, recyclable or compostable; 70 per cent of plastic would be recycled or composted, 50 per cent would be the average recycled plastic, including in packaging, and we'd be phasing out single-use plastic. I think it's safe to say we are going to fail abysmally at achieving these 2025 targets. The proportion of recyclable packaging has decreased from 86 to 84 per cent—though there was a change to this score, so maybe it's a bit muddy, there. But it's not going up. The plastic recycling rate increased from 18 to 20 per cent—way off the 70 per cent target. The average recycled content of packaging has increased by a mere one percentage point from 39 to 40, and problematic and unnecessary single-use plastic has been reduced from 33 per cent from the 2017-18 baseline.</para>
<para>The case for government intervention and regulation is made if industry cannot get its act together. Plastic in our external environment is an externality, and it's an unpriced externality. In my opening monologue you heard about the damage it is doing to the environment, to biodiversity and, potentially, to human health. If industry is not acting, we need to start pricing that externality. The warning to industry is that if it doesn't get its act together soon, that will be priced.</para>
<para>To borrow an ice hockey term from my time in the US—maybe it's out of place in Australia here—the puck is moving in that direction. We have a very proud and successful packaging industry in Australia, be it Amcor or Pratt manufacturing. If Australian innovators can get their act together and see that the puck is moving in this direction, there is going to be a huge economic opportunity globally to get either recycled or substitute packaging manufacturing opportunities for this country. There'll be jobs, and it will become a huge export industry.</para>
<para>Domestically, we also need to look at recycling programs. Sorting is a huge problem, and even the technology involved in sorting—when we're only getting 10 per cent of plastic being recycled, that's largely a sorting problem. It's not a uniquely Australian problem. This is a global problem and more and more dollars will be going here.</para>
<para>We need a sustainable market for recycled plastics. Again, we may, at some stage, need to look at a tax, a levy or some sort of pricing mechanism. State and federal governments need to work together to work out how we can reduce consumption. There is a need for regulation here. I would prefer a market mechanism, but we have an externality that is not being dealt with effectively.</para>
<para>Let me be direct: the reason people are using plastic is that it's got a lot of great properties. It's cheap, it's flexible, and it's quick and easy to produce. So there is a market product there, but we now have evidence of the damage it is doing to enjoyment of waterways, to marine biodiversity and to human health. We do need to start acting. There is innovation and funding going towards it. But I think it is similar to energy policy with net zero, where there is a case for regulation by government and for potentially pricing this.</para>
<para>If I were an Australian manufacturer out there in this industry, I would think that there is a huge opportunity to actually start moving towards this. There is a huge economic opportunity, not just a domestic opportunity but also an export opportunity. I would love to see Australian companies taking the lead in that, capturing a global market and doing great stuff.</para>
<para>I'd like to make a couple of shout-outs to businesses I have seen doing that. Siklus in Indonesia is making products as much as 40 per cent cheaper while providing a refill cart for food and cleaning items, such as soap, to reduce single-use plastic waste. Kal Glanznig is a local resident in my electorate who's produced the film <inline font-style="italic">Rising Up</inline>. <inline font-style="italic">Rising Up</inline> is an epic film that discusses the problem of plastics and then talks about the many innovators in the private sector who are starting to solve this problem. I am filled with hope. I do think this is a solvable problem and there are technologies out there that begin to solve it today.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr RYAN</name>
    <name.id>297660</name.id>
    <electorate>Kooyong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Plastic pollution is a significant threat to the world's marine and freshwater ecosystems. This recent report by the Standing Committee on Climate Change, Energy, Environment and Water highlights the size of this challenge.</para>
<para>All of the plastic that we have ever produced is still in existence. It will take between 500 and 1,000 years to degrade. On average, Australians use 130 kilograms of plastic per person per year. That's more single-use plastic than any other country. Only 14 per cent of plastic from Australia is recycled. As much as 130,000 tonnes of plastic leaks into our environment every single year, and the CSIRO has found that three-quarters of the waste and rubbish on Australia's coastlines is plastic.</para>
<para>Globally, the figures are even worse. Plastic waste makes up 80 per cent of all marine pollution. If we think about that horrible thing known as the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, it alone is the biggest accumulation of plastic waste in the world. It includes an estimated total of 1.8 trillion pieces of plastic waste; that's 250 pieces of plastic for every human on the planet. It's inconceivable. This is a plastic rubbish heap which is 17 times the size of Tasmania.</para>
<para>By 2050 the plastic in our oceans will outweigh the fish. The plastic that litters our rivers and seas comes from our clothes and from packaging. It's detritus from our workplaces and homes. It's leftovers from barbecues, kids' parties and sporting events. All of it leaks because of poor waste management, stormwater run-off and illegal dumping. Its effects on marine life are disastrous; as many as 100,000 marine animals and one million seabirds are killed by plastic every year. Abandoned fishing gear and nets are particularly harmful; they entangle and kill turtles, seabirds and even dolphins. But the effects on humans are also of serious concern. We know now that microplastics and nanoplastics are everywhere. They're in our drinking water. They're in our soil. They carry chemicals on their surfaces. They cross the placenta and the blood-brain barrier. We don't yet understand the health implications for us and future generations.</para>
<para>So far, Australia's approach to plastic waste has been fragmented and inadequate. We've had a number of national plans from this government and previous governments which have been aimed at reducing plastic waste, but all have focused more on recovery, particularly on recycling, not on reducing the production and consumption of plastics in the first place—which, logically, is where we should start. The inexorable growth in the plastics waste generated in this country in recent years has shown us these policies are not working. This committee's report calls for an updated plan with specific and measurable goals and for stronger industry accountability. It also highlights the need for a sustainable end market for recycled plastics.</para>
<para>We need to standardise bans on single-use plastics and waste collection standards across all Australian states and territories. We need to fund Indigenous ranger programs to support their work in cleaning up our marine debris. And we should encourage the primacy of First Nations participation in our international negotiations regarding plastics pollution. It's absolutely vital that the government works with all states and territories and the scientific experts—including particularly the CSIRO—to limit the plastic debris which enters our marine environment via stormwater.</para>
<para>But, of course, the very best measure, returning to the theme, is reduction of our use of plastics. Forty-nine per cent of all marine pollution that comes out of Australia results from the use of single-use plastics. All of us can act on this. We can use reusable, rather than plastic, bags. We can reduce our use of disposable plastic cups. We can buy food and cleaning products in bulk, and transport them in glass or metal containers rather than plastic ones. At a government level, a tax on plastic packaging in Australia would likely be an effective measure. We've seen similar taxes imposed in Europe, with great effect. Extended producer responsibility schemes have also shown promise overseas and have been highlighted in this report as a possible means of decreasing our plastic pollution.</para>
<para>Plastic pollution is a global issue, and Australia needs to play a leading role in international efforts to combat it. This report supports the development of a legally binding international treaty on plastic pollution and encourages Australia to facilitate the participation of smaller nations in those discussions. This important report, <inline font-style="italic">Drowning </inline><inline font-style="italic">in w</inline><inline font-style="italic">aste</inline>, provides a clear road map for addressing the urgent and important issues of plastic pollution in Australia. By implementing its recommendations, we can reduce plastic pollution, safeguard our marine life and lead the way regionally in the global efforts to end this concerning crisis.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TINK</name>
    <name.id>300124</name.id>
    <electorate>North Sydney</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the recent report of the Standing Committee on Climate Change, Energy, Environment and Water,<inline font-style="italic">Drowning in waste: </inline><inline font-style="italic">p</inline><inline font-style="italic">lastic pollution in Australia's oceans and waterways</inline>. As the member for North Sydney, I have the great privilege of living in and representing a community with a significant amount of harbour foreshore and other waterways in one of the most beautiful cities in the world. This stunning environment is a key part of the fabric of our community, from our social connection at parks and our recreation to our mental health, our exercise, our children's sport and the wellbeing of our pets.</para>
<para>More broadly, water is an iconic part of Australia's cultural identity, from our world-renowned beaches and stunning small islands to our World Heritage sites such as the Great Barrier Reef, Ningaloo Reef and Katherine Gorge and the collective pride we share in our world champion swimmers, sailors, surfers and water polo players. More critically, water is, of course, essential for life.</para>
<para>Because of our intimate connection to water, Australians have a visceral sensitivity to the idea of drowning, so I have no doubt that my community feels the findings of this report incredibly deeply. Now we are drowning in waste. We know from the very title of the committee's report that plastic pollution poses a significant threat to Australia's biodiversity, to our human health and to our oceans and waterways due to the harm it causes to us directly and to marine and freshwater life and ecosystems. Shockingly, Australians consume more single-use plastic per person than any other country in the world except Singapore.</para>
<para>New research from the CSIRO estimates that every minute across the globe a garbage truck's worth of plastic enters the ocean. Up to 11 million tonnes of larger items of plastic pollution, from nets to cups and plastic bags and everything in between, is sitting on the ocean floor, clustered around continents. These enormous amounts of plastic are disproportionately affecting our incredible regional and remote coastal locations. Although inland and coastal seas cover much less surface area than do the oceans—just 11 per cent versus 56 per cent of our entire earth's area—these areas are predicted to hold as much plastic mass as does the rest of the ocean floor.</para>
<para>Of course, we see a lot of this plastic locally on our harbour foreshore before it gets to the ocean. Most notably, on Clean Up Australia Day, the most common type of litter reported in Australia was soft plastic, followed by single-use plastic. This has certainly been reflected in the litter my volunteers and I have collected each year on that day.</para>
<para>At the same time, we face the threat of microplastics and forever chemicals everywhere, including in our very drinking water. Recently, to the concern of many, including my community of North Sydney, Australian media reported that potentially unsafe levels of forever chemicals had been detected in drinking water supplies around Australia. These include human-made chemicals classed under the broader category of PFAS chemicals, the same ones United States authorities warn can cause cancer over a long period of time, with reports warning there is no safe level of exposure.</para>
<para>Microplastics have now been found in all environments, including the polar regions, from Mount Everest to the deepest oceans, and in foods such as sea salt and beer, and by next year it's predicted that 99 per cent of seabirds will have ingested some form of plastic. Barely a month goes by without an alarming new headline on the prevalence of microplastics. Just this year we've already had 'Microplastics found in every human testicle in study: Scientists say discovery may be linked to decade-long decline in sperm counts in men around the world' and 'Microplastics found in every human placenta tested in study: Scientists express concern over health impacts, with another study finding particles in arteries'.</para>
<para>It's no surprise that each aspect of this toxic onslaught is a matter of profound concern across the communities and different generations of North Sydney. Most recently, I received the following email in response to an article about the carcinogens in our water supply. The author wrote:</para>
<quote><para class="block">How can we get some answers on the most disappointing and distressing article? I've also heard roundup chemicals are showing up in human breast milk. What can be done about this?</para></quote>
<para>At the same time, I've heard from many constituents keen to do the right thing, who struggle, in the face of the collapse of REDcycle, with the enormous amount of plastic they accumulate domestically and the lack of convenient opportunities to environmentally dispose of things such as blister packs. I've had constituents who have written to me about the threat of microplastics and landfill remaining present for generations and their increasing presence in marine and food supply structures, and about the prevalence of forever chemicals already banned in the EU in the durable water-resistant coating used on Australian jackets. That constituent wrote:</para>
<quote><para class="block">This coating is known as C6 (perfluorohexane sulfonic acid)—it's supposed to be a nicer version of the more toxic C8, but appears to exhibit many of the same significant issues in terms of human health and damage to the environment</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">… due to our lax regulations we risk (and already are) becoming a bit of a dumping ground for companies to get rid of their stocks of these chemicals—until we catch up with meaningful restrictions—which is really disappointing.</para></quote>
<para>Everyone who has reached out to me about this wants, more than anything, action. Overwhelmingly, the message from my community is threefold: (1) we're aware we're drowning in waste, (2) it's intolerable and (3) we urgently need our government to act. The stakes are too high not to act. This beautiful environment, so rich in diversity, and the health of our next generations are not ours to gamble with.</para>
<para>The first, crucial step has been taken: the vital work of the committee in holding hearings and inviting submissions and distilling the evidence into this sobering report with its 22 key recommendations. I really want to thank the committee for their work and for these recommendations, which represent a practical way for our government to channel the community's urging of action into effect.</para>
<para>Importantly, the committee's recommendations include the implementation of a national plan, with an annual report to parliament on the progress of key actions from that plan, and for the government to prioritise a sustainable end market for recovered plastics as a matter of urgency.</para>
<para>The seventh recommendation is for the government, as a priority, to take a leadership role in coordinating and tracking actions in relation to the reduction of the use of plastics, in the face of our woeful ranking as second in the world for the use of single-use plastics.</para>
<para>Other recommendations include making it easier for consumers to recycle more effectively through effective labelling; developing and funding public awareness and education on proper recycling practices; and commissioning research to determine the impacts of microplastic ingestion, inhalation and skin contact on human health, and making it publicly available. All are concrete actions which respond to the pressing concerns I hear from my community in this area.</para>
<para>I urge the government to implement all of the committee's recommendations without delay—in particular, the first recommendation, that being to develop, through the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water and in consultation with the states and territories, industry and the community, an updated National Plastics Plan—not in a future term of government but now, in this term, in the final year of the 47th Parliament. Please do not let this report sit on a shelf gathering a film of microplastics. I urge you: throw a drowning nation a rope and act now.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Health, Aged Care and Sport Committee</title>
          <page.no>144</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report</title>
            <page.no>144</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs McINTOSH</name>
    <name.id>281513</name.id>
    <electorate>Lindsay</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In Australia, 1.5 million people live with diabetes. This is one of our country's most serious and important health issues for governments to address. The health committee's diabetes report, <inline font-style="italic">The </inline><inline font-style="italic">state of diabetes mellitus </inline><inline font-style="italic">in Australia</inline><inline font-style="italic">in </inline><inline font-style="italic">2024</inline>, was tabled a few months ago in parliament. The report uncovered the growing prevalence of diabetes right across the country. It is a public health imperative that we take immediate action on every form of diabetes that impacts the lives of Australians.</para>
<para>I note the report acknowledges that type 1 diabetes can be triggered by COVID-19. It reads:</para>
<quote><para class="block">As part of the inquiry, the Committee heard evidence discussing the possibility of a COVID-19 infection being an environmental trigger that could influence the development of Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes. Multiple submitters, including the Department of Health and Aged Care, referenced emerging evidence suggesting that there may be a link between COVID-19 and new-onset Type 1 and/or Type 2 diabetes.</para></quote>
<para>I think the research is now clear that this is the case. As the mother of a son who developed type 1 diabetes shortly after having COVID-19 in 2022, it is heartening to know that this is being taken seriously by the committee. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the work of the incredible medical researchers who continue to investigate the triggers of autoimmune diseases and how we can best prevent, diagnose and manage these occurrences.</para>
<para>As the deputy chair of the committee at the time of the inquiry, it was my strong desire that we maintain a tight focus on type 1 diabetes and, in particular, its impact on young people. Regarding type 1 diabetes, I support all the recommendations that we handed down in the report. The report recommends further research funding into diabetes within the Australian context. This is needed for those with type 1, where research is the only way to a cure.</para>
<para>The report also calls for more diabetes educators. The public health system is extremely stretched. As parliamentarians, we all know this from the many stories we hear weekly from constituents. With my son's type 1 diagnosis, I experienced firsthand the need for more diabetes educators. Nepean Hospital, in my electorate, had only one type 1 diabetes educator for new patients. The story is the same right across Western Sydney for those with type 1. The daily work of diabetes educators is so important for those who have just been diagnosed, as it will be throughout their life.</para>
<para>In terms of medical technology, there is a recommendation to extend constant glucose monitoring, CGM, devices to all. Regarding insulin pumps, we've seen the Albanese Labor government cut choices available to those with type 1 to one product. This must change now, and we acknowledge this need in the report. For those with type 1, choice is pivotal in ensuring they have access to the devices that work for them. I've strongly advocated for those with type 1 diabetes to have access to fully subsidised devices, given that those who are now aged 21 and above must make co-payments for these life-saving and needed daily products.</para>
<para>Choice in devices and ongoing advances in medical technology is life saving for those managing type 1 diabetes, and this cannot be understated. We need such ideas to be taken up by government so that the lives of those with this chronic illness are made easier. Every kid with type 1 deserves a device that works for them so they can play sport with their friends in the playground and not worry and can participate as an athlete at even the most elite levels of sport.</para>
<para>There is no doubt that Australia has an epidemic in relation to type 2 diabetes. Some of the highest rates of type 2 diabetes are in Western Sydney, including in my own electorate of Lindsay, spanning from Penrith to St Marys. Urgent action needs to be taken to change this. This action spans all three levels of government, as well as academia and community stakeholders. In terms of type 2 diabetes, I strongly support early intervention, especially the promotion of physical activity and healthy eating habits, which should be ingrained in the primary school curriculum. Type 2 diabetes is on the rise in our kids, and we need to counter this immediately. If we do not act now to stop the growth of type 2 for the next generation, we are going to see poorer life outcomes for many kids in low socioeconomic areas and, in particular, more pressure applied to our public health system.</para>
<para>It is time for a new public health campaign to encourage healthy, active lifestyles with a focus on the prevention of type 2 diabetes. As the member for Lindsay, I started a healthy active living network in my community when I was first elected in 2019. It is a passion of mine to ensure that every child and adult has a sport they want to play that is accessible to them or that they even get out and about and do the river walk along the Nepean River.</para>
<para>We need every policy lever pulling in the same direction in order to combat type 2. We need governments to step up and tackle this issue head on. Other factors like diet and education are critical in all age groups to stop more diagnoses of type 2. Low carbohydrate diets need more attention in this respect. As a former shadow assistant minister for mental health and suicide prevention, I fully support the recommendation for the government to review access to juvenile mental health services for those with diabetes. Kids with type 1 often feel disengaged and feel they can't participate in so much. This is the same, of course, for children with type 2. There is a psychological element of diabetes that our young people must combat every day. The report noted that diabetes patients make more than 180 diabetes related decisions a day. That is extraordinary.</para>
<para>I thank my fellow committee members for their work on this report and for their expertise—many are doctors, including the chair and my good friend the member for Macarthur—and I thank others like the members for Higgins, Kooyong, Mackellar and Robertson. I also want to thank the member for Berowra for taking on the deputy chair position of the committee, as I became a shadow minister and was made a supplementary member for the remainder of the inquiry. I want to especially thank the members of the committee from Western Sydney, including the members for Hughes, Macarthur and Werriwa. You all have an acute understanding of how type 2 impacts our communities and our health systems. I also want to acknowledge the late member for Dunkley Peta Murphy for her contribution to the committee's work.</para>
<para>Finally, I would like to give a shout-out to a clinician on the frontline in Western Sydney, Dr Kathryn Williams, whose work on obesity in its most severe forms is extraordinary. I thank her for her ongoing advocacy in type 2 and obesity research as well.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PERRETT</name>
    <name.id>HVP</name.id>
    <electorate>Moreton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I've been involved with the Parliamentary Friends for the Prevention of Diabetes for my entire time in politics, and I was elected in 2007. I'm currently co-chair with my good friend the member for Grey. We wanted to name that group 'the enemies of diabetes', but we weren't allowed to. Over the past year, I've had an additional focus, as I was seconded for membership of the health committee for the parliamentary inquiry into diabetes. This year-long inquiry had nearly 500 submissions, and the committee met with stakeholders all around the country. I want to do a particular call-out to Dr Mike, who chaired that committee, and acknowledge all of the other committee members who were so warm and welcoming. To the member for Macarthur, Dr Mike Freelander: this report is a testament to your incredible leadership, and I really want that to be on the record. It is a real recipe for how this nation can go forward. I want to thank you. Thank you for lending me this report—my prop. I'll give it back to Dr Mike, who did an incredible job.</para>
<para>That report, <inline font-style="italic">The state of diabetes mellitus in Australia in </inline><inline font-style="italic">2024</inline>, only released last month, comes at a time when diabetes is the fastest growing chronic or noncommunicable disease in Australia. It's a tsunami. The report has 23 recommendations and highlights the health and economic costs of diabetes. It also provides insight into the proposed next steps in handling what Diabetes Australia calls 'the epidemic of the 21st century and the biggest challenge confronting Australia's health system', which is an incredible statement. We know that diabetes affects people in all communities across the country, some disproportionately, and that access to services is not equitable. I developed this interest in diabetes because my mum was a type 2 diabetic. The report points out that to combat diabetes we need to focus not only on prevention but on education, on agriculture and on manufacturing, amongst many other things.</para>
<para>Today I'd like to focus on the report's fourth recommendation, which states:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The Committee recommends that the Australian Government implements a levy on sugar-sweetened beverages, such that the price is modelled on international best practice and the anticipated improvement of health outcomes. The levy should be graduated according to the sugar content.</para></quote>
<para>In December 2022, the World Health Organization released its first global tax manual for sugar sweetened beverages, also known as SSBs. As of February 2023, 106 countries and territories had implemented a sugar levy. These included the United Kingdom, France, South Africa and many of our Pacific neighbours. The application of a levy on sugar sweetened beverages is proven to reduce demand and have a positive effect on health outcomes. I was shocked when I learned that Australians drink more than 2.4 billion litres of sugary drinks each year. That's an average of 92 litres per person. I think my sons are doing their bit to keep those averages up. These are drinks like flavoured milk, soft drinks, energy drinks, fruit juices and vitamin waters. They are flavoured with sweeteners such as sucrose, high-fructose corn syrup or fruit juice concentrate. The Australian Medical Association describes them as containing 'a high number of liquid calories but providing almost no nutritional benefit'. People who regularly consume these kinds of drinks have an increased risk of developing debilitating and even terminal health issues. These can range from dental cavities to weight gain and obesity, heart disease, stroke and type 2 diabetes.</para>
<para>There are approximately 1.5 million Australians living with all types of known, diagnosed diabetes. Eighty-seven per cent of these people have type 2 diabetes. That's a staggering 1.3 million Australians. Diabetes Australia believes a further half a million people are living with undiagnosed type 2 diabetes. The inquiry showed that treating type 2 diabetes is placing a significant burden on Australia's health resources. It affects numerous branches of medicine, such as obstetrics, paediatrics—which I think Dr Mike might know a little bit about—neurology, cardiology vascular surgery, ophthalmology and geriatrics. Type 2 diabetes has strong genetic and family related risk factors, but it is also often caused by modifiable lifestyle choices. People can slow or stop the progression of the condition by changing their diet and increasing the amount of exercise that they do. Being overweight can contribute to the risk of developing type 2 diabetes, and the introduction of a levy on SSBs would help work to diminish this risk.</para>
<para>Last year the Australian Medical Association had this to say about a sugar levy:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Our analysis projects this tax would reduce consumption by 31 per cent by 2025-26, and is estimated to result in 16,000 fewer cases of type 2 diabetes, 4,400 fewer cases of heart disease, and 1,100 fewer cases of stroke. It is a simple but effective way to improve the lives of Australians.</para></quote>
<para>The AMA also told the inquiry:</para>
<quote><para class="block">To effect a change in SSB consumption, both a clear message for consumers that the product is unhealthy, and a tangible deterrent are warranted. A tax can deliver on both counts by creating a price signal that the product is unhealthy, and reducing consumption through higher prices (and therefore lower affordability). Furthermore, an appropriately designed tax can also incentivise manufacturers of SSBs to reformulate their products to contain less free sugar.</para></quote>
<para>That is actually what has happened throughout the world. Manufacturers are still making drinks, still putting them into supermarkets, still selling them to customers, but there is just less sugar consumed.</para>
<para>Of course, simply implementing a levy on SSBs will not solve the type 2 diabetes problem. I'm a big believer in community infrastructure that gets communities moving, because of all the benefits that flow from that: communities are safer, there is less crime, there are better connections and there is less chance of any fear-and-division campaign taking hold in a community where people are out there exercising together, sharing meals, making friendships, watching sports together. There are numerous other factors—such as an active lifestyle and education on and access to healthier food choices—at play. However, reducing sugar intake through a levy on sugar-sweetened beverages is an important piece of the puzzle and one that I believe should be implemented. I say that as someone coming from the Sunshine State, with all of my in-laws living in Far North Queensland. Dr Mike Freelander, the member for Macarthur, again I thank you for your leadership on the health committee and for letting me work with the committee on such an important inquiry. I commend the document for everyone to read.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr RYAN</name>
    <name.id>297660</name.id>
    <electorate>Kooyong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I too would like to acknowledge the great work done by the member for Macarthur, the Chair of the Standing Committee on Health, Aged Care and Sport, in undertaking this inquiry and bringing the report to completion. It is a really important one. I'd also like to acknowledge my medical colleagues on the health committee, the members for Higgins, Mackellar and Robertson, and the two deputy chairs of the committee, the members for Berowra and Lindsay, and other members of the committee but particularly the former member for Dunkley Peta Murphy, who is much missed by all of us on that committee.</para>
<para class="italic"><inline font-style="italic">A division having been called in the House of Representatives—</inline></para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 17:09 to 17:20</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Dr RYAN</name>
    <name.id>297660</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>One in 20 Australians—that is, 1.5 million people—lives with diabetes. That is a number which continues to increase. Unfortunately, and terrifyingly, this country now faces an epidemic of diabetes. Type 2 diabetes is by far the most common form. In Australia it is much more likely to affect people of lower socio-economic standing. They're people who often have less access to clean water and affordable fresh food, have less time and less space for regular physical activity and often have less access to good quality health care.</para>
<para>In particular, First Nations peoples globally, but particularly in Australia, have a frighteningly high incidence of diabetes. They develop it at a younger age, and their progression to often-life-threatening complications is frighteningly rapid. Diabetes is the leading contributor to the gap in life expectancy between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are nearly five times more likely to be hospitalised for diabetes related complications. Diabetes is the leading cause of death for Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory. The reasons for this are complex, and they include both genetic predisposition and a whole raft of socio-economic factors.</para>
<para>But many of our policy settings could be adjusted to immediately improve protections for First Nations and other vulnerable Australians. The first of these is the urgent need for action on our diet. Australians eat too many ultra-processed foods and too many foods with added sugar and hidden chemicals. Unhealthy foods represent one-third of Australian children's diets. One in four Australian children is either overweight or obese. Most Australians just don't understand how much sugar is added to our food. The regulation of food manufacturers in this country is rubbish, whether we're talking about dietary codes for infant formulas or the health star ratings we apply to other foods. Parents often think they're feeding their kids healthy food, but products which are labelled as 'containing no added sugar' can still contain added sugars in the forms of gels, pastes or purees. Only 22 per cent of the infant and toddler foods stocked in Australian supermarkets meets the nutritional standards of the World Health Organization. In particular, many breastmilk substitutes, or what we call toddler milks or toddler formulas, are effectively just sugary drinks. Labelling codes for those drinks and for other foodstuffs in this country are voluntary.</para>
<para>Only 41 per cent of products on our supermarket shelves display health star ratings, and there's a reason for that: the manufacturers of healthy products use them as a marketing tool, but others, the unhealthy foods, just decide not to display a score. The star system is also problematic in and of itself, though. It doesn't distinguish between natural sugars and added sweeteners. It gives higher ratings to ultra-processed foods and lower ratings to whole foods. We urgently need a mandatory food labelling scheme which will provide accurate and clear health information to consumers when they buy food for themselves and their families.</para>
<para>The health committee also recommended that the Australian government implement a levy graduated according to the sugar content of sugar sweetened beverages; these are sports drinks, soft drinks, energy drinks and vitamin waters. These drinks cause weight gain but they have limited nutritional value. They carry calories but not much else. A levy on these soft drinks would encourage industry to reformulate those drinks, and it would lessen consumption in the same way that similar measures have decreased consumption of tobacco and alcohol in Australia.</para>
<para>More than 35 public health organisations have now asked the government to levy a sugar-sweetened beverage tax in this country. But the major political parties, sadly, are not listening. Data from 85 international jurisdictions has shown that sort of levy is effective in decreasing sugar consumption. In fact, a recent study in the US showed a 40 per cent decrease in gestational diabetes and a corresponding improvement in obstetric outcomes, like low birth weight, after imposition of a sugary drink levy. That was within a couple of years of that intervention.</para>
<para>Gestational diabetes is a real worry for Australians, because it affects not only the women who have it and who are at increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes in later life; it also has permanent and ongoing implications for the children who sit in the mum's tum while that mum has diabetes during pregnancy. Earmarking the revenue from a sugar-sweetened beverage levy would be an immediate way of identifying funds which could help with public health measures, and that would help engender public support for this concept.</para>
<para>It was a great privilege to be a member of the parliamentary committee which investigated diabetes in Australia, but I have to say that much of what we heard was confronting and difficult. It's very clear that this scourge is something that will be a huge challenge for all of our healthcare systems in the years to come. The efforts of that committee will be wasted if this government does not act on the committee's findings.</para>
<para>The committee visited some First Nations communities in which we saw people with minimal access to fresh fruit and vegetables and who couldn't access affordable, drinkable water. We saw communities where children were carrying around two-litre bottles of Coke because it was cheaper than the bottled water that was the only other source of fluid they could access. We could help those people and those communities in the simplest and most fundamental of ways. We could improve the regulation of the food and drinks industry in this country. But, if we don't, we will all bear the cost of that and the loss associated with this plague that the diabetes epidemic represents.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr FREELANDER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
    <electorate>Macarthur</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—This report of the Standing Committee on Health, Aged Care and Sport took over 18 months, and we heard from people all around the country about the public health emergency that is diabetes in Australia. We know that there are approximately 150,000 people with type 1 diabetes, over 1.5 million people with type 2 diabetes and more than that number with prediabetes. It's a major public health emergency. We have seen that almost 50 per cent of presentations to our emergency departments are related to diabetes in some way, from complications like renal failure, cardiovascular disease and retinal disease with visual impairment to all the other long-term complications of diabetes, leading to huge pressure on our health system. Peripheral vascular disease, which is preventable, is often a presentation of people with type 2 diabetes. We are doing more amputations in Australia than we should be because of this scourge of diabetes. It's a huge burden on our health system.</para>
<para>This inquiry is important, as it looks at how we could change this narrative and trajectory, because, if we don't, our health system will not be able to cope. We've already seen in areas like the Northern Territory the scourge of renal failure even at a relatively young age. This is people in their 20s with renal failure requiring dialysis because of type 2 diabetes. The trajectory is very bad. In my medical lifetime, we've seen persistent increases in life expectancies every year. In the lifetime of my parents and grandparents, similar has been true. But we are now in a time where, in the developed world, life expectancies are plateauing. The increases in life expectancy that have been seen for over three generations are now changing. In some states in America, they're actually seeing decreases in male and female life expectancies.</para>
<para>One of the big causes of this in the developed world is diabetes. In particular, diabetes is affecting those in disadvantaged communities. We see this in Australia. Type 2 diabetes—not type 1 diabetes—tracks disadvantage. We see this in the outer suburbs of our major capital cities. We see it in western and south-western Sydney in electorates like mine, Macarthur, and in electorates like Fowler, Werriwa and Lindsay where there are very high incidences of diabetes. It is putting enormous pressure not just on our health system but also on our social security system and even on our education system, with many adolescents now presenting with obesity and type 2 diabetes. It is very prevalent, as has already been mentioned, in our Indigenous community. It's now appearing in our Pacific islander community and in our subcontinental communities. The increasing incidence of obesity and type 2 diabetes is causing major health complications.</para>
<para>I started the type 1 paediatric diabetes clinic at Campbelltown hospital 30 years ago. It was becoming apparent then that the management of diabetes was very complex and required a team approach. It was difficult to provide that in private practice. We started that type 1 diabetes clinic at Campbelltown hospital many years ago, in the 1990s. Then, about 10 or 12 years ago, we started to see an increasing number of children presenting with obesity and type 2 diabetes. As we travel around our communities in outer metropolitan areas, rural areas and regional areas, and as we travel to Indigenous communities in remote areas, in particular, we are finding this problem of early onset type 2 diabetes. This is causing an early trajectory towards complications like vascular disease, blindness and kidney failure. These communities are now being devastated by the numbers of adolescents and young adults who are presenting with type 2 diabetes and all its complications. This trajectory has to be changed. It's bad for the communities, it's bad for the wider Australian society and it's something that we need to reverse if we are going to see a return to continuing increases in life expectancy in a well-developed and wealthy society like Australia—hence, the report.</para>
<para>The report has 23 important recommendations that have already been spoken about. Some are controversial and some are not, but they need to be taken in their entirety. We don't want this report to be left on a shelf gathering dust. It's now my job to take this around the country, and I'll be speaking to state health departments and state health ministers about how we can get implementation of the recommendations from this inquiry. As I said, there are 23 of them. Some of them require some investment, but that investment will reap financial rewards if we can turn this epidemic around. That is now my job. It is a public health emergency, as I've said, and it requires a public health response which can only be led by governments from all persuasions, from local to state to federal.</para>
<para>I think that if we are going to turn this around it is going to require action as soon as possible. That is going to depend on many of the committee members who gave their time and their efforts to the inquiry. In particular, I would like to thank the co-opted members—Graham Perrett, the member for Moreton, and Sophie Scamps, the member for Mackellar—as well as my medical colleagues and non-medical colleagues on the committee. I'd like to also pay tribute to Peta Murphy, who was a member of our committee until her death. She understood the social determinants of health very well, was committed to our inquiry and was a big part of our recommendations.</para>
<para>I'd like to thank those who provided submissions to our inquiry, from Diabetes Australia to JDRF. All of the major medical institutes provided supports for us. In particular, I'd like to single out the Grattan Institute, who provided a very comprehensive view of the social issues involved with type 2 diabetes and obesity. And there were all the other institutes in places like Darwin in the Northern Territory, where the Menzies Institute was able to provide very good evidence of the difficulties that diabetes was causing in remote and rural communities.</para>
<para>I would like to thank all the kind words that my fellow committee members have said about the report, and about me in particular. But I'd like to stress that this is a report of the whole committee, and I'm incredibly grateful for all the work they put into what I think is a very important inquiry and what are very important recommendations. I am committed to making sure that we have uptake of those recommendations. I know the health minister has looked very favourably upon our recommendations and is doing his best to help with the adoption of the inquiry's recommendations.</para>
<para>We know that prevention has to be the main aim. If we continue on this trajectory of increases in the number of people with diabetes, our health system will be put under unbelievable pressure and other health priorities will suffer. I commend the report to the parliament and I commit to continuing to impress upon those in power the importance of taking up these recommendations.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
<para>Federation Chamber adjourned at 17:37</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
  </fedchamb.xscript>
</hansard>