2024-11-21 2 1 0 House of Reps 0 1

Thursday, 21 November 2024

The SPEAKER ( Hon. Milton Dick ) took the chair at 09:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.

BILLS 1 BILLS Migration Amendment (Prohibiting Items in Immigration Detention Facilities) Bill 2024 1

Migration Amendment (Prohibiting Items in Immigration Detention Facilities) Bill 2024

First Reading 1 Second Reading 1 09:01 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I move: That this bill be now read a second time. A well-functioning migration system is essential to Australia's social, cultural and economic wellbeing. An essential feature of a well-functioning immigration system is the ability to, where necessary, safely detain noncitizens pending their removal from Australia or while their visa status is otherwise resolved. Over recent years, asylum seekers have been replaced in immigration detention by individuals who have had their visa cancelled on character grounds, who often have serious criminal histories. About 90 per cent of the current case load hold a criminal conviction, including violent and drug related crimes. The current coherent includes outlaw motorcycle gang members, which brings a higher degree of volatility and organised criminality. These convicted criminals seek to continue their criminal behaviour in immigration detention, which has led to an increasing number of events that threaten the health, safety and security of staff and other detainees, as well as visitors. These events have included harassment, intimidation, threats of violence and actual violence, often fuelled by alcohol and illicit substances. There have been incidents of criminals in detention facilities using encrypted messaging services to run drug trafficking and other organised crime activities. This causes harm not just to people in detention facilities but to the broader Australian community. These behaviours are not acceptable anywhere in Australia, and they are not acceptable in immigration detention facilities. Officers need extended powers, including the power to search and seize communications devices to stop this from happening. This bill responds to calls for action from the Australian Border Force, as well as external parties including the Australian Human Rights Commission. The Human Rights Commission's report into conditions at Yongah Hill Immigration Detention Centre recommended expanded search powers for staff. The bill would amend the Migration Act to allow the minister to determine, via a disallowable legislative instrument, that an item is a 'prohibited thing' in relation to immigration detention facilities or persons in detention, if the minister is satisfied that the thing is unlawful to possess in a place or places in Australia or if the thing would pose a risk to the health, safety or security of a person in a facility, or the order of a facility. The bill will also strengthen powers to search for, screen, seize and retain prohibited and controlled items without a warrant, and will allow for searches within centres, including the use of detector dogs to search the premises. The bill will include safeguards to ensure a detainee's right to communicate freely continues to be met. The bill specifically requires that to exercise the powers to search for and seize a prohibited thing that is otherwise not unlawful to possess or use, an officer must first believe on reasonable grounds that such search or seizure is necessary to prevent or lessen a risk to the health, safety or security of people in the immigration detention facility, or to the good order of the facility. If such a thing is seized it must also be returned as soon as an officer no longer holds that view or the detainee requests its return. Further, to ensure the rights of detainees to engage in communications with others outside of the detention facilities are maintained, if the thing that is seized is a mobile phone or communication device, the detainee will be provided with an alternative device until such time as their device is returned. This will ensure there is no impact on their ability to contact their friends and family or to engage in any other lawful communication under their constitutionally implied rights. The alternative means of communication must be reasonably sufficient to enable the detainee to communicate with family, as well as anyone outside the facility for the purposes of obtaining legal advice. To be clear, the bill does not establish a blanket prohibition against the possession or use of mobile phones in immigration detention. Communication devices may only be confiscated when they are being used in a way which would pose a risk to the safety of others in the facility. The powers provided in this bill are reasonable, proportionate and essential to ensure the safety and wellbeing of all people in immigration detention facilities. The bill effectively balances the rights of the individuals with the duty of care owed by the Commonwealth, and I commend it to the House. Debate adjourned. Health Legislation Amendment (Modernising My Health Record—Sharing by Default) Bill 2024 2

Health Legislation Amendment (Modernising My Health Record—Sharing by Default) Bill 2024

First Reading 2 Second Reading 2 09:07 Mr BUTLER HWK Hindmarsh I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Since Medicare was introduced 40 years ago, technology has advanced immeasurably. Back in 1984, 'cutting edge' meant a Sony Walkman in your pocket, an Apple Macintosh on your desk and a fax machine in your office. Walk into so many health settings today, you'll find a smartphone in your pocket, a fitness tracker on your wrist, and in the corner where the fax machine used to be there is another fax machine. That's right: a technology first invented in 1964—20 years before Medicare—is still frustratingly, maddeningly, all too common in Australian healthcare settings. When we came to government, My Health Record was in dire need of an upgrade. It was still using the old PDF format that Labor installed when we were last in government. It was cutting edge then, but it is beyond clunky now. For almost 10 years, nothing was done to upgrade the technology that underpinned it. While the broader economy went through a digital revolution that reshaped industries, My Health Record sat there, gathering dust. Without investment, My Health Record remained little more than 'a shoebox of PDFs'. Unsurprisingly, there isn't much confidence in such an outdated system. In the most recent Health of the Nation survey by the Royal College of General Practitioners, 31 per cent of GPs—effectively one in three—said they rarely or never use My Health Record. Even fewer specialists use it: half of them haven't even registered with it. We have to do better. The Strengthening Medicare Taskforce, which brought together clinicians, consumers and experts from right across the health sector, called on us to do better. In the 2023 budget, we announced almost $1.1 billion in funding to modernise digital health infrastructure and to upgrade My Health Record to a data rich platform. This bill gives effect to recommendations made by the Strengthening Medicare Taskforce. The taskforce recommended that My Health Record should be modernised to significantly increase the health information available to individuals and to their healthcare professionals, including by requiring the sharing of health information by default. It also called for significant improvements to the way that patients' information is shared across the health system. Consumers now expect their healthcare providers to have access to the information that they need, and, far too often, they don't. When we announced the government's intentions to introduce these reforms, just one in five diagnostic reports in radiology were being shared or uploaded to My Health Record. The other four reports, out of five, simply disappeared into the digital ether. And only one in two pathology reports were shared at the same time. Patients just find this so frustrating, because every lost test result means another day off work, another waiting room, another procedure and, for some, yet another gap fee. It's a complete waste of time and money for patients and for the health system. If a patient gets a diagnostic scan or a pathology test, then those results should be shared or uploaded to their My Health Record. This was happening by exception. It was not the norm. Implementation and engagement with the sector Last year, the government announced that we intended to make it the norm. Australians are accessing their My Health Record in unprecedented numbers. In September this year, individuals' views of their health information via My Health Record are up 70 per cent on the same time a year ago. These numbers highlight that consumers are crying out for better access to their own information. In the past year, the Department of Health and Aged Care and the Australian Digital Health Agency have worked tirelessly to support the pathology and diagnostic imaging sectors to uplift their systems and their staff, in readiness for sharing tests and scans by default. This has already seen great results. Many labs that were not sharing, or sharing only in limited circumstances, are now routinely making patient results available to My Health Record. In May last year, just one in five diagnostic imaging reports were being sent to My Health Record. A year later, it's now one in three reports. While this is an improvement, it's still too low and too slow. Framework for sharing to My Health Record The reforms I introduce today introduce a framework that will require key health information to be shared to patients' My Health Record. We're starting with pathology and diagnostic imaging. However, this framework will position the My Health Record system to deliver access to key information, and become a routine, central part of our health system. Medicare provides universal access to health care for Australians. Today we're enhancing the My Health Record framework to provide better access to Australians' health information to reduce the fragmentation and duplication that currently exists and also to deliver better health outcomes. The bill will establish requirements so that where Medicare rebates are claimed for key services, there will be a requirement to share information about that service to My Health Record. And the bill will require healthcare corporations to share health information about their patients to their patients' My Health Record. This complementary framework will not affect a patient's Medicare benefits. It will however empower patients to actively engage as partners in their own health care. Patient controlled The bill complements the existing consumer-controlled nature of My Health Record, and continues to put patients first. Patients will have access to their information so that they can have informed discussions with their healthcare providers, if they choose to. The Strengthening Medicare Taskforce told us that when people can access and are supported to use and understand their own health information, they're better able to actively participate in their care and to make informed decisions. The bill will not change the patient-controlled nature of My Health Record. Individuals can continue to choose not to have a My Health Record. Or they can choose for certain records not to be shared. Patient choice will remain under these amendments. Whether or not a patient chooses to engage with the information in their My Health Record, under the changes this bill introduces, they can expect information will nonetheless be available. Patient safety The framework puts patients first and is designed with patient safety in mind. We heard during consultation that it will not always be in an individual patient's interests for them to access their information before discussing it with their healthcare team. If a healthcare provider is concerned that it may not be in a person's interest to access information via My Health Record without the support of a qualified healthcare provider, a healthcare provider can elect for an individual record not to be shared. Electing not to upload should not be the norm. But where a healthcare provider has a reasonable concern for an individual's safety or wellbeing so as to warrant not uploading, this exception will provide an appropriate safeguard so that the right supports are in place for patients when they are needed. A clinical reference group, chaired by the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care and the Australian Digital Health Agency, was established to advise on this proposal and ensure the safe implementation of these reforms. This clinical reference group, with representatives from government, peaks and consumers, will also develop guidance materials to support healthcare providers with the new framework for sharing to My Health Record. Support for providers to connect The Australian Digital Health Agency has invested to support providers to connect to My Health Record. However, notwithstanding that investment, we understand that some healthcare providers have not yet made the decision to connect to My Health Record. The framework I announce today is not designed to be punitive. It is designed to bring about a culture of sharing. For those providers that require assistance to connect, they will be able to make formal application to request time to put the necessary technical settings in place to enable them to engage with the My Health Record System. While this formal extension period is in place, they will be able to continue to claim Medicare benefits, while working with the Australian Digital Health Agency to set up the necessary connections so that eventually all patients will be entitled to the same levels of access to their information. Enforcement I said the bill is not designed to be punitive. However, if organisations do not do the right thing by their patients, this bill will provide the powers necessary to ensure compliance with the requirement to upload. Patients will not have to wait for uploads to get their Medicare benefits. And patients will not lose benefits if providers fail to share to My Health Record. Where Medicare is payable, if uploads do not follow, providers will be liable to repay the cost of the benefit. Conclusion Let's be clear about why our government is so committed to this. Yes, it will make healthcare professionals' lives easier, by helping them to be more efficient and more effective. Yes, there will be flow-on benefits across the system, helping to ensure that every precious dollar in the Medicare system goes to patient care. Those things are obviously important. But the reason why we are driving so hard towards that digital future is not provider benefit or system benefit so much as patient benefit. Patient benefit is—and always will be for this government—our northern star. Patients desire and deserve access to their own health data, and agency over how it is used and how it is shared. Patients should not have to rely on the goodwill or the good management of private providers to be able to access their own health data. Digital health technologies should empower patients to monitor and take charge of their own health and wellbeing, so that they can interact confidently with healthcare providers and build their own health literacy. This is what drives our government's efforts, in the year of Medicare's 40th birthday. As well as being better for patients, this is also better for the bottom line of healthcare providers. Because every dollar that goes to a needless or duplicate test or scan, is a dollar that doesn't fund lifesaving medicines or our hardworking doctors, nurses and other health professionals. Every minute a GP doesn't spend searching through My Health Record for a result that may or may not have been stuffed into 'the PDF shoebox', is a minute that they can spend caring for their patient. Every minute a practice nurse doesn't have to spend manually entering a patient's data into their My Health Record, is a minute that they could be administering a childhood vaccination. The Productivity Commission estimates that more than $5 billion a year could be saved by reforming Australia's digital health infrastructure. Beyond the savings, it is—quite simply—what patients nowadays expect and deserve. By the time Medicare reaches its next milestone birthday, we can confidently expect that the humble fax machine will no longer clutter the offices of health professional settings. Like the Sony Walkman or the Apple Macintosh, the fax machine will finally become little more than a museum relic. I'm sure I speak for patients everywhere when I say: that day can't come soon enough. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Aged Care (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2024 5

Aged Care (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2024

First Reading 5 Second Reading 5 09:20 Ms WELLS 264121 Lilley I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Aged Care (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2024 makes transitional and consequential changes to support the commencement of the Aged Care Bill 2024. It is an essential component in enabling us to move forward with once-in-a-generation reform of our aged-care system and services. The bill operates so that the references to the 1997 Acts and the Commission Act in other Commonwealth legislation are read as references to the Aged Care Bill 2024. Schedule 1 makes consequential changes to the Crimes Act 1914 and the National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013 to facilitate aged-care worker screening checks and align aged-care worker screening with NDIS worker screening. It also makes changes to the Freedom of Information Act 1982 to give effect to royal commission recommendation 88 by removing aged-care-specific FOI exemptions. Schedule 2 of the bill consists of 10 parts, six of which correspond directly to chapters of the Aged Care Bill. This schedule details the transitional provisions which will ensure the smooth transition of individuals, providers, workers and governance arrangements when the new Aged Care Act commences. During the exposure draft consultations and through the Community Affairs inquiry we heard very strongly that everyone needs time and support to prepare for the new act. Within the changes to the aged-care system which the new act will bring, we recognise that everyone will need support to understand what it means for them, what they will need to do and when they will need to do it. We will support older people, providers and workers to prepare for the changes arising from the new act by providing clarity on what is new, what is changing and what is staying the same. We are assembling an aged-care transition taskforce to help providers manage implementation challenges, including ICT, education and compliance. Eligible providers will also be able to apply for up to $10,000 to assist with the costs of any IT changes needed to prepare for 1 July. The bill includes provisions that will ensure that individuals can move as seamlessly as possible from the 1997 act, the Commonwealth Home Support Program and the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Flexible Aged Care Program to the new act. This bill also includes provisions which will deem approved providers to be registered providers under the new act. This will smooth the transition process for providers and ensure that they can continue to provide services to older people, uninterrupted. The bill also includes technical provisions to clarify how provider obligations, governance arrangements, regulatory powers, information management and decision reviews will transition to the new act. The bill also provides a crucial rule-making power to allow transition to be managed in a careful and considered way. The scale of this reform means we need to be able to act quickly during transition to address challenges and unforeseen impacts. Finally, this bill repeals the Aged Care Act 1997, the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission Act 2018 and the Aged Care (Transitional Provisions) Act 1997. From the commencement, it will make the Aged Care Act 2024 the Commonwealth's primary aged-care legislation and pave the way for the future of aged care. The passage of the aged-care bill and its consequential provisions has the potential to provide a new and enduring foundation for the Australian aged-care system from 1 July 2025 and for years to come. We owe it to older Australians who rely on aged care now to get this done. We owe it to the growing number of people who will rely on the system in the future. We also owe it to the countless number of people I've heard about and spoken to whom this system let down: people like John, who died in pain in aged care in Toowoomba because his home mismanaged his medication; people like Val, who waited in hospital for weeks to get the support she needed before she could go home; and people like Cyril, who deserved to live and die in dignity. Let's get this legislation passed for them and build a new and enduring foundation for aged care that puts the rights of older people first. I thank the House. Debate adjourned. Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024 6

Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024

First Reading 6 Second Reading 6 09:25 Ms ROWLAND 159771 Greenway I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Introduction Keeping Australians safe online is a top priority for the Albanese government. We are focused on positive solutions to issues of national concern, and the issue of harms to children and young people from social media is right up the top of that list. Since coming to government we have taken steps to turn this focus into meaningful outcomes, with a range of measures to help make the online environment better for young people. Central to this has been our quadrupling of the ongoing base funding for the eSafety Commissioner, to ensure this world-leading regulator has the certainty of resourcing and is equipped to respond to existing and emerging online harms. I brought forward the review of the Online Safety Act by 12 months. This was in recognition of the need for the act to remain fit for purpose, and I thank the independent reviewer for recently providing her report to me. In May this year, I amended the Basic Online Safety Expectations to make clear the government's expectation that platforms must place the best interest of the child at the centre of their products and services. And today, I introduce the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024. Social media as we commonly and collectively understand it, has become a ubiquitous and a normal part of life for all of us, and many young Australians take part in this activity without adverse consequence. It can be a source of entertainment, education and connection with the world—and each other. Those things, particularly for young Australians, can be beneficial. But, for too many young Australians, social media can be harmful. Almost two-thirds of 14- to 17-year-old Australians have viewed extremely harmful content online, including drug abuse, suicide or self-harm, as well as violent material. A quarter have been exposed to content promoting unsafe eating habits. Research conducted by eSafety found that 95 per cent of Australian caregivers find online safety to be one of their toughest parenting challenges. The Albanese government has heard the concerns of parents, young people and experts. Social media has a social responsibility. We know they can—and should—do better to address harms on their platforms. That's why we're making big changes to hold platforms to account for user safety. The Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024 will amend the Online Safety Act 2021 (OSA) by introducing a minimum age of 16 to have an account on age-restricted social media platforms, protecting young Australians at a critical stage of their development. The bill puts the onus on social media platforms, not parents or young people, to take reasonable steps to ensure fundamental protections are in place. This is about protecting young people—not punishing or isolating them—and letting parents know we're in their corner when it comes to supporting their children's health and wellbeing. We know establishing a minimum age for young people having social media accounts is not the only approach that needs to be taken and we know that this measure will not be met with universal acceptance. But this is one step among many that a government should take in the protection and not the isolation of young people. There is wide acknowledgment that something must be done, in the immediate term, to help prevent young teens and children from being exposed to streams of content—unfiltered and infinite. It is the right thing to do for the right reasons at the right time. Through extensive consultation and with the input of states and territories, we are agreeing that until a child turns 16, the social media environment as it stands is not age-appropriate for them. I acknowledge everyone who participated in consultation across the country for their contribution, however small, to this world-leading reform. The bill I am introducing today does not provide the magic pill to resolve or eliminate every harm children face online, nor does it seek to rule out digital participation and inclusion for young people. And we also acknowledge that harms don't simply switch off on a child's 16th birthday. That is why the government has taken the decision to bring forward a key recommendation of the online safety act review, to legislate a digital duty of care. Legislating a digital duty of care is a separate body of work, and will place the onus on digital platforms to proactively keep Australians safe and better prevent online harms. Legislating a duty of care will mean services can't 'set and forget'. Instead, their obligations will mean they need to continually identify and mitigate potential risks, as technology and service offerings change and evolve. While the social media minimum age legislation introduced today is targeted at the protection of children under 16, the duty of care will ensure all Australians are better protected from online harm. Critically, this legislation will allow for 12 months implementation—to ensure this novel and world-leading reform can take effect with the care and consideration that Australians rightly expect. The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner will be resourced to provide oversight of the privacy provisions as they relate to this bill. Regulated activity The bill we have introduced today establishes an obligation on social media platforms to take reasonable steps to prevent age-restricted users from having an account. This places the onus on platforms to introduce systems and settings to ensure that under-age users cannot create and hold a social media account. A systemic failure to take action to limit such circumventions could give rise to a breach. By regulating the act of 'having an account', as opposed to 'accessing' social media more generally, we are seeking to strike a balance between protecting young people from harm, while limiting the regulatory burden on the broader population. Importantly, this obligation would help to mitigate the risks arising from the harmful features that are largely associated with user accounts, or the 'logged-in' state, persistent notifications and alerts, which have been found to have a negative impact on sleep, stress levels, and attention. Regulated services The obligation will apply to 'age-restricted social media platforms', a new term being introduced into the Online Safety Act. Its definition includes that a 'significant purpose' of the service is to enable online social interactions between two or more users. While the definition casts a wide net, the bill allows for flexibility to reduce the scope or further target the definition through legislative rules. Achieving this through rules, rather than primary legislation, enables the government to be responsive to changes and evolutions in the dynamic social media ecosystem. Rules can be made to allow for additional conditions that must be met, in order to fall within the definition of 'age-restricted social media platform'. To be clear, the government expects that this broader definition will capture services that are commonly accepted to be social media, and the services that are causing many parents the most concern. This will, at a minimum, include TikTok, Facebook, Snapchat, Reddit, Instagram, X (formerly Twitter), among others. These services will be required to take reasonable steps to prevent persons under 16 years of age from creating or holding an account. A rule-making power is also available to exclude specific classes of services from the definition. In the first instance, this power will be used to carve out messaging services, online games, and services that significantly function to support the health and education of users. A key principle of the approach to applying an age limit of 16 to social media was the recognition that our laws should be set to protect young people—not isolate them. There is a legitimate purpose to enabling young people to actively participate in the digital environment where they have grown up. Supporting their digital participation, connection and inclusion is important at every age and stage of a young person's development and our legislation seeks to strike that balance. We are not saying that risks don't exist on messenger apps or online gaming. While users can still be exposed to harmful content by other users, they do not face the same algorithmic curation of content and psychological manipulation to encourage near endless engagement. Further, the inclusion of messaging apps could have wider consequences, such as making communication within families harder. Online games are currently regulated under the National Classification Scheme. The scheme provides information on the age suitability of online games through a combination of the classification and relevant consumer advice. Imposing additional age-based regulation to online games would create unnecessary regulatory overlap. This categorical rule-making power is expected to deem out of scope services such as Facebook Messenger Kids, and WhatsApp. The rule will provide for an 'out of scope' status to also be applied to services like ReachOut's PeerChat, Kids Helpline 'MyCircle', Google Classroom, YouTube, and other apps that can be shown to function like social media in their interactivity but operate with a significant purpose to enable young people to get the education and health support they need. Before making a rule, the minister must seek advice from the eSafety Commissioner, and must have regard to that advice; and may seek advice from any other authorities or agencies of the Commonwealth that the minister considers relevant, and may have regard to any such advice. This is an important condition to ensure rules are made with the appropriate safeguards in place while reflecting community standards. Privacy safeguards Privacy reform in Australia has been long overdue, and the Albanese government has taken significant steps to bring privacy standards up to community standards. This is novel reform, and to implement a minimum age for social media requires steps to be taken by users to assure age. Where this user is a child, a government must sharpen its focus with the expected level of care to ensure strong privacy provisions are in place. While the digital economy has generated significant benefits, including consumer convenience, improved efficiencies and new employment opportunities, it has also resulted in large amounts of information about people being generated, used, disclosed and stored. Widespread adoption and reliance on digital technologies increases the risks that personal data will be subject to misuse or mishandling, including through data breaches, fraud and identity theft, unauthorised surveillance and other significant online harms. For these reasons, the bill introduces more robust privacy protections, which strictly prohibit platforms from using information collected for age assurance purposes for any other purpose, unless explicitly agreed to by the individual. The approach taken in the bill expands on Australia's privacy framework, taking a heightened approach to information protection that is informed by the 2022 review of the Privacy Act. Compliance with the minimum-age obligation will likely involve some form of age assurance, which may require the collection, use and disclosure of additional personal information. The bill makes it explicit that platforms must not use information and data collected for age assurance purposes for any other purpose, unless the individual has provided their consent. This consent must be voluntary, informed, current, specific and unambiguous—this is an elevated requirement that precludes platforms from seeking consent through preselected settings or opt-outs. In addition, once the information has been used for age assurance or any other agreed purpose, it must be destroyed by the platform (or any third party contracted by the platform). Serious and repeated breaches of these privacy provisions could result in penalties of up to $50 million under section 13G of the Privacy Act. Given the vitality of robust privacy and security for Australians online, in the case of the minimum age for social media, we will undertake additional consultation to determine what reasonable amendments we can introduce ahead of passage of the legislation. Penalties In making these reforms, it is critical we send a clear signal to platforms about the importance of their social responsibilities to children and all Australians. As such, this bill will impose significant penalties for breaching the minimum-age obligation. This will be as high as $49.5 million for bodies corporate, consistent with serious offences set out in the Privacy Act 1988 and Competition and Consumer Act 2010. The bill increases penalties for breach of industry codes and industry standards to up to $49.5 million for bodies corporate. This addresses the currently low penalties in the OSA, and reflects the systemic nature of the harms that could arise from breaches of the codes and standards. Additional regulator powers The bill equips the eSafety Commissioner with additional tools and powers to effectively administer the new minimum age framework. This includes powers to request information from platforms about how they are complying with their obligation, particularly the compliance with privacy provisions. Commencement The minimum age obligation on social media services will commence no earlier than 12 months from passage of the bill. This will allow the necessary time for social media platforms to develop and implement required systems. This timeframe will also enable implementation to be informed by the age assurance trial, which will provide guidance on the market readiness of age assurance technologies, and inform advice to government and the eSafety Commissioner on implementation and enforcement of the minimum age. Review Finally, the bill incorporates a review of the legislation two years after effective commencement. This provides the government with an opportunity to undertake critical societal measurements of the impacts of the legislation, using qualitative and quantative research to understand how this policy is working for young Australians. It will allow time to recognise any technological advancements since commencement, to reconsider the definition of an age-restricted social media platform, and to consider whether other digital platforms such as online games or additional social media platforms that can be viewed without an account should be captured within scope. We will work with the education, health, youth organisations and community organisations throughout implementation and during the review to take in their views. Conclusion This measure is a key component of the Albanese government's work across the online safety space and will help enable young people to use the internet in a safer and more positive way. It will signal a set of normative values that support parents, educators and society more broadly. Australia has consistently paved the way in global online safety, and the introduction of this legislation is no exception. The bill builds upon the Australian government's work to address online harms for young people, including the age assurance trial, establishing an online dating apps code, and legislating new criminal penalties for nonconsensual sharing of sexual deepfakes. The government will ensure young Australians retain access to services that primarily provide education and health services, and work constructively with stakeholders to ensure that only services that meet the strict criteria under eSafety's powers are able to be accessed by children under 16 years. This bill seeks to set a new normative value in society—that accessing social media is not the defining feature of growing up in Australia. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. PARLIAMENTARY ZONE 10 PARLIAMENTARY ZONE Proposed Works 10 09:43 Ms McBAIN 281988 Eden-Monaro I move: That, in accordance with section 5 of the Parliament Act 1974, the House approve the following proposal for work in the Parliamentary Zone which was presented to the House on 6 November 2024, namely: Senator Neville Bonner AO commemorative sculpture and associated works. Approval is sought from the House for the National Capital Authority to commence work to install a life-sized statue to commemorate the life of the late Senator Neville Bonner AO, a Jagera man from Queensland, near the Old Parliament House Senate Rose Gardens. Senator Bonner AO was the first Indigenous Australian elected to the Australian parliament, serving between 1971 and 1983. He was appointed by the Queensland parliament to fill a casual vacancy in the representation of Queensland in the Senate, and later became the first Indigenous Australian to be elected to parliament by popular vote. The statue installation is part of the NCA's program to commemorate underrepresented groups in Australia's democracy. The proposed statue is based on photograph chosen by Senator Bonner's family of him in a suit, holding four boomerangs, one he is preparing to throw. The NCA has consulted extensively with Mr Bonner's family, the United Ngunnawal Elders Council and the Museum of Australian Democracy. The statue is due for completion in mid-2025 and is expected to be unveiled in the second half of 2025 to mark an anniversary of Senator Bonner's life and his service. Question agreed to. COMMITTEES 10 COMMITTEES Public Works Joint Committee 10 Approval of Work 10 09:45 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fenner I move: That, in accordance with the provisions of the Public Works Committee Act 1969, it is expedient to carry out the following proposed work which was referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works and on which the committee has duly reported to Parliament: Department of Defence—Guided Weapons and Explosive Ordnance Storage Program Tranche 2. The Department of Defence is proposing works to provide increased guided weapons and explosive ordnance storage facilities at the Defence Establishment Orchard Hills, New South Wales, at an estimated cost of $244.9 million excluding GST. The proposed works include earth covered buildings for explosive ordnance storage, non-explosive ordnance storage facilities, upgraded electrical supply infrastructure and engineering services required for the new facilities. The project was referred to the Public Works Committee on 1 July 2024. On 5 November 2024 the committee tabled a report on the project in the House of Representatives recommending that the House resolve, pursuant to section 18(7) of the Public Works Committee Act 1969, that it is expedient to carry out the project. The committee also recommended that the project funding be increased to allow additional earth covered buildings, which are currently below-the-line items, to be completed as part of this project. The government thanks the committee for this recommendation. However, there is no additional funding available within the Defence Integrated Investment Program to increase the project budget to allow additional earth covered buildings to be delivered by the project. This is because all other funding within the Defence Integrated Investment Program has been allocated to other priorities outlined in the National Defence Strategy. Additional earth covered buildings can only be delivered by the project if there are cost savings against other project scope elements during delivery. On that basis the government does not agree to the committee's recommendation. Subject to parliamentary approval, the proposed works are expected to commence in late 2024 and be completed by late 2026. On behalf of the government, I thank the committee, ably chaired by the member for Moreton, for undertaking a timely inquiry. I commend the motion to the House. Question agreed to. Public Works Joint Committee 11 Approval of Work 11 09:48 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fenner I move: That, in accordance with the provisions of the Public Works Committee Act 1969, it is expedient to carry out the following proposed work which was referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works and on which the committee has duly reported to Parliament: Department of Defence—Explosive Ordnance Facilities Northern NSW Redevelopment project. The Department of Defence is proposing works to refurbish, upgrade and replace facilities at the Defence Establishment Orchard Hills, New South Wales, at an estimated cost of $359.3 million excluding GST. The proposed works include new and upgraded working facilities required for the procurement, storage, distribution and maintenance of explosive ordnance and support activities; new and upgraded training facilities and student living-in accommodation; upgraded base entry and perimeter security; and upgraded utilities and infrastructure to address current and future capability requirements. The project was referred to the Public Works Committee on 1 July 2024. On 5 November 2024 the committee tabled a report in the House of Representatives recommending the House resolve, pursuant to section 18(7) of the Public Works Committee Act 1969, that it is expedient to carry out the proposed works. The committee also recommended that the project budget be increased to allow a second block of 60 additional living-in accommodation rooms to be completed as part of the project. The government thanks the committee for this recommendation; however, there is no additional funding available within the Defence Integrated Investment Program to increase the project budget to allow a second block of living-in-accommodation rooms to be delivered by the project. This is because all other funding within the Defence Integrated Investment Program has been allocated to other priorities outlined in the National Defence Strategy. The second block of 60 additional living-in-accommodation rooms can therefore only be delivered if there are cost savings against other project scope elements during delivery. On that basis, the government does not agree to this recommendation. Subject to parliamentary approval, construction of the proposed works is expected to commence in mid-2025 and be completed by mid-2028. On behalf of the government, I thank the committee, ably chaired by the member for Moreton, for undertaking a timely inquiry. I commend the motion to the House. Question agreed to. REGULATIONS AND DETERMINATIONS 11 REGULATIONS AND DETERMINATIONS Health Insurance (Extended Medicare Safety Net) Amendment (Indexation) Determination 2024 11 09:50 Ms RISHWORTH HWA Kingston On behalf of the Minister for Health and Aged Care, I move: That, in accordance with section 10B of the Health Insurance Act 1973, the House approve the Health Insurance (Extended Medicare Safety Net) Amendment (Indexation) Determination 2024 made on 12 November 2024 and presented to the House on 18 November 2024. Question agreed to. COMMITTEES 12 COMMITTEES National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee 12 Report 12 09:52 Ms COKER 263547 Corangamite On behalf of the Joint Standing Committee on the National Disability Insurance Scheme, I present the committee's report, incorporating a dissenting report, entitled General issues: annual report No. 2 of the 47th Parliament. Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e). Ms COKER 263547 by leave—I'm pleased to table the Joint Standing Committee on the National Disability Insurance Scheme's Annual report No. 2 of the 47th Parliament. I'd like to thank everyone who lodged a submission, appeared at public hearings or shared their views to us over the past year. I'd particularly like to thank all participants, their families and carers who have contributed to this report. Your lived experience of the scheme is so important. And I'm proud to be part of a committee that listens to you and values your insights—insights that provide the foundation for shaping meaningful recommendations to improve the NDIS. The submissions and other evidence received as part of this report highlight opportunities to strengthen the role we play as a committee to oversight the scheme. As a result, the report recommends that the committee's resolution of appointment be amended to the next parliament to include consideration of the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission annual reports. This will bring the committee into line with other parliamentary oversight bodies. The report also details the three inquiries our committee has progressed during this term of parliament, from the inquiry into NDIS general issues to the inquiry into the capability and culture of the NDIA and also our current inquiry into the NDIS participant experience in rural, regional and remote Australia. Through these inquiries, our committee has received 363 public submissions, held 18 public hearings, tabled four reports and made 32 recommendations. I'd like to thank all members of the committee for making this a reality. The report also looks at the new and proposed changes to the NDIS introduced by the Albanese government and the National Disability Insurance Agency since the committee published its last general issues report earlier this year. In doing so, it maintains the committee's focus on three key themes highlighted in annual report No. 1: co-design, choice and control, and sustainability. The government's new and proposed changes to the scheme include: passage of the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Act 2024, the establishment of a NDIS Provider and Worker Registration Taskforce, cracking down on fraud to protect the sustainability of the NDIS, publication of the NDIS cultural and linguistic diversity strategy and action plan 2024 to 2028, and additional funding of the $227.6 million over five years for a new specialist disability employment program. The report also outlines the government's work to establish a new children's expert advisory group to work with the NDIA to co-design improvements to the NDIA for children and their families. And, importantly, the report considers the Australian government's initial response to the final report of the disability royal commission. The committee welcomes the level of consultation and engagement that the government is undertaking on a range of changes to the NDIS. The report notes recent consultations by the Department of Social Services on a range of issues including: the response to the disability royal commission's final report, the new definition of NDIS supports, foundational supports, and the new specialist disability employment program. Our committee also maintains the view that co-design principles, choice and control for participants, and sustainability remain crucial for the success of the NDIS in improving the lives of people with disability. And to this end, the committee will continue to provide oversight of the government's implementation of the recommendations of the disability royal commission and the NDIS review. On that note, I want to thank the secretariat and the committee members for their work on this report, and I encourage all members to consider the committee's report closely. With these comments I commend the committee's annual report No. 2 to the House. BILLS 13 BILLS Treasury Laws Amendment (Mergers and Acquisitions Reform) Bill 2024 13

Treasury Laws Amendment (Mergers and Acquisitions Reform) Bill 2024

Report from Federation Chamber 13 10:02 The SPEAKER 53517 The question before the House is the amendment be agreed to.    

The House divided. [10:02]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

57 AYES Andrews, K. L. Archer, B. K. Bell, A. M. Birrell, S. J. Boyce, C. E. Broadbent, R. E. Caldwell, C. M. Chaney, K. E. Chester, D. J. Coleman, D. B. Conaghan, P. J. Coulton, M. M. (Teller) Daniel, Z. Dutton, P. C. Entsch, W. G. Fletcher, P. W. Gillespie, D. A. Goodenough, I. R. Haines, H. M. Hamilton, G. R. Hastie, A. W. Hawke, A. G. Hogan, K. J. Howarth, L. R. Joyce, B. T. G. Kennedy, S. P. Landry, M. L. Ley, S. P. Littleproud, D. Marino, N. B. McCormack, M. F. McIntosh, M. I. O'Brien, E. L. Pearce, G. B. Pike, H. J. Pitt, K. J. Price, M. L. Ramsey, R. E. (Teller) Ryan, M. M. Spender, A. M. Steggall, Z. Stevens, J. Sukkar, M. S. Taylor, A. J. Tehan, D. T. Thompson, P. van Manen, A. J. Vasta, R. X. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Ware, J. L. Webster, A. E. Willcox, A. J. Wilson, R. J. Wolahan, K. Wood, J. P. Young, T. J. 77 NOES Aly, A. Ananda-Rajah, M. Bandt, A. P. Bates, S. J. Belyea, J. A. Burke, A. S. Burnell, M. P. Burney, L. J. Burns, J. Butler, M. C. Byrnes, A. J. Chalmers, J. E. Chandler-Mather, M. Charlton, A. H. G. Chesters, L. M. Clare, J. D. Claydon, S. C. Coker, E. A. Collins, J. M. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. Fernando, C. Freelander, M. R. Garland, C. M. L. Georganas, S. Giles, A. J. Gorman, P. Gosling, L. J. Hill, J. C. Husic, E. N. Jones, S. P. Kearney, G. M. Keogh, M. J. Khalil, P. King, C. F. King, M. M. H. Lawrence, T. N. Laxale, J. A. A. Leigh, A. K. Lim, S. B. C. Marles, R. D. Mascarenhas, Z. F. A. McBain, K. L. McBride, E. M. Miller-Frost, L. J. Mitchell, B. K. Mitchell, R. G. Mulino, D. Neumann, S. K. O'Connor, B. P. J. O'Neil, C. E. Payne, A. E. Perrett, G. D. Phillips, F. E. Plibersek, T. J. Rae, S. T. Reid, G. J. Repacholi, D. P. Rishworth, A. L. Roberts, T. G. Rowland, M. A. Ryan, J. C. Shorten, W. R. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thwaites, K. L. Vamvakinou, M. Watson-Brown, E. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. Wilkie, A. D. Wilson, J. H. Zappia, A. 0 PAIRS

Question negatived.
Bill read a second time.

 Consideration in Detail 14 10:07 Ms CHANEY 300006 Curtin by leave—I move amendments (1) and (2), on the sheet revised 20 November 2024, as circulated in my name, together: (1) Schedule 1, item 35, page 26 (line 16), omit paragraph 51ABP(3)(c). (2) Schedule 1, item 35, page 27 (line 21), omit "may consider any reports or", substitute "must seek and consider the". Amendment (1) relates to an ability for the minister, preserved in the bill, to introduce market concentration based thresholds for compulsory notification. It can be hard to define a market, and competition lawyers can argue for days about what that market definition is. Market concentration based thresholds for compulsory notification add complexity and are opposed by many competition law experts because they add uncertainty, risk and compliance cost to the first step in the clearance process. Amendment (1) deletes section 51ABP(3)(c) to remove the ability for the minister to introduce market concentration based thresholds. I'm putting this amendment forward because it needs to be really clear to companies as to when they need to notify. The government heard that during the consultation process and isn't putting it in the current threshold tests but is preserving the ability to do that in the future. I think, for the sake of simplicity and certainty for business, it would be better not to have that ability in there. Amendment (2) is about the role of the ACCC when the Treasurer designates high-risk parts of the new economy so that the ACCC will be able to review all mergers, regardless of whether they meet the other key thresholds. This could be used for airlines, supermarkets or any industry where there are specific competition concerns, but the bill doesn't require the Treasurer to seek advice from the ACCC before making such a designation. I think this is a problem. ACCC consultation should be a requirement not an option. I'm proposing that section 51ABQ(4) be amended to require advice from the ACCC to be sought and considered before the Treasurer designates any high-risk part of the economy. I think this is necessary because I'm concerned that this could be used for political purposes where a particular industry could be kicked with greater scrutiny in an effort to appease the public rather than where there are specific and well-founded competition concerns. I'm not reassured by the government saying that the ACCC could always participate in the public consultation process. The ACCC has specific expertise and a specific role in this area and should be consulted specifically in advance of any public consultation. These two amendments are minor but practical improvements to much-needed reform so that we can build a more competitive economy. 10:10 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fenner At the outset can I say I am grateful for the way in which the member for Curtin has approached these amendments. She brings a great deal of policy rigour to her analysis of issues in the House, and the parliament benefits from her insights and her consideration of this and many other issues. The government, however, will not be supporting the amendments, and I wish to outline in process and specific terms why that is. The first is that these amendments were only circulated yesterday for a bill which has been through a very extensive consultation process. For the benefit of the House, can I outline some of that consultation process. The Competition Taskforce within Treasury was established in the middle of last year, and merger reform has been the major issue that they have considered. They have conducted extensive consultation to inform the policy and legislative design, including three public consultations. They've engaged in targeted stakeholder engagement and meetings to gather a diversity of perspectives. They have met with groups representing consumers, larger businesses, including multinational firms, and small and medium enterprises. They've engaged with businesses in the agricultural sector, with legal practitioners, with academics and industry associations, and all non-confidential submissions are available on the Treasury website. The bill was also considered by the Competition Review Expert Advisory Panel comprising some of the best Australian and global competition thinkers: Kerry Schott, David Gonski, John Asker, Sharon Henrick, John Fingleton, Danielle Wood and Rod Sims. I want to thank each of them and the competition taskforce, led by Jason McDonald and Marcus Bezzi, for their careful analysis of these reforms. It's also worth the House being aware that following its introduction to the House the bill went through extensive scrutiny in the Economics Legislation Committee. The committee unanimously recommended passage of the bill after hearing from key stakeholders. I'll take the House now to the specifics of the member for Curtin's amendments. Regarding the 'notification threshold' amendment, the relevant provision makes it clear that the level of concentration in a market may be a specified threshold in any legislative-instrument-determining notification threshold. The Treasurer has clearly decided that market concentration should not be used as a way of assessing whether a matter should be notified as this bill takes effect, but it is possible that there may be circumstances in the future where a minister may want to take a different view. The provision as currently drafted would enable that flexibility without needing to amend the legislation. The Treasury and the ACCC are working together to develop data analytic capability which may in future provide a reliable evidence base for a threshold that uses concentration in a market. If so, there might be substantial efficiencies for business and the ACCC in being able to use such a threshold in the future. Regarding the 'classes of acquisition' amendment moved by the member for Curtin, including 'may' allows more targeted consideration as there may be many reports or pieces of advice which could be irrelevant to the immediate matter under the minister's consideration. It's important that the minister be able to flexibly exercise the power in 51ABR independently of the ACCC, which is the regulator and administrative decision-maker. The exercise of the Treasurer's power would be subject to the usual parliamentary scrutiny process. In closing, can I note that this is the biggest reform to Australia's merger laws in half a century. I want to thank the many stakeholders who've engaged with us on this reform journey, reform which will see Australia's merger laws become more efficient and more timely, better targeted at high-risk mergers and underpinning the more dynamic competitive economy that the Albanese government is committed to. Competition reform is a core aspect of our cost-of-living plan, delivering better prices for Australians. But it's also critical to ensuring economic dynamism, as the House economics report, chaired by Daniel Mulino, made abundantly clear. Merger reform is one of the most important parts of competition law. I commend the bill to the House and I thank the member for Curtin for her engagement with it, albeit that the government will not, on this occasion, be supporting her proposed amendments. Question negatived. Bill agreed to. Third Reading 16 10:16 Dr BU8 Fenner LEIGH (—) (): by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Oversight Legislation Amendment (Robodebt Royal Commission Response and Other Measures) Bill 2024 16

Oversight Legislation Amendment (Robodebt Royal Commission Response and Other Measures) Bill 2024

Report from Federation Chamber 16 Third Reading 16 10:18 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Free TAFE Bill 2024 16

Free TAFE Bill 2024

Second Reading 16 10:18 The DEPUTY SPEAKER 230531 The original question was that the bill be now read a second time. To this the honourable member for Melbourne has moved as an amendment that all words after 'that' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. The question is that the amendment be agreed to. (Quorum formed) 10:22 Ms LE 295676 Fowler I actually went to TAFE, more than three decades ago. I was in a transition phase. I did not know what to do with my life, so I thought I'd do an accounting course at TAFE—Liverpool TAFE, to be precise. There were lots of students like me from non-English-speaking backgrounds. We had a good time. But either the course wasn't engaging enough or I wasn't really focusing on the subject of numbers, because eventually I dropped out. Then I ended up getting a job as a journalist for the Liverpool Champion in the early nineties, so my career as a journalist began. It was a short TAFE experience. I did make friends, but it didn't give me the skills—or, as I said, perhaps I wasn't totally drawn to the subject. Thus I found that the time was not very valuable—for me, at least. I understand that the Labor government is so committed to investing in TAFE, with the belief that it will somehow solve our workforce skills shortages—investing so much money into providing the 500,000 fee-free TAFE places. TAFE has certainly played an important role in the development of a skilled workforce in Australia in the past 141 years, and I want to acknowledge that contribution. Skills and training have never been as important as they are today. Whilst the industrial revolution had a hugely disruptive impact on blue-collar workers in the 19th and 20th centuries, the internet and the development of AI are having a similarly disruptive effect on the white-collar workforce in the 21st century. Many of the sources of employment that have become the norm for the past hundred years are going to either transform or vanish altogether as technology progresses. Jobs and Skills Australia released its report this week identifying that our labour market is remarkably resilient but there are also considerable economic challenges and uncertainties. Our labour force has shifted dramatically, with healthcare and social services becoming the largest employing industry, whilst in 1994 it was manufacturing. The rise of social media and AI technology has huge ramifications for our labour workforce. But, in speaking with many small to medium sized businesses in a recent manufacturing round table in Fowler, my electorate, I heard a different story, about the needs of many of our manufacturing businesses. Fee-free TAFE might be an incentive for young people to engage in vocational careers, but business owners in Fowler have other concerns. Many of them in key sectors have an average workforce age in the 60s and find it very difficult to persuade young people to enter their industries. This is because the culture has told them that manufacturing jobs are second-rate or lack prestige. More than simply throwing money at fee-free TAFE, we need to reshape the narrative around trade based occupations. Parents need to be convinced that it's a good option for their children. Schools need to promote the value of entering trades as well as that of university education. Fee-free courses don't house or feed students. What plans are there to provide grants or loan programs, perhaps via industry, to get Australians into these jobs? That is how you encourage young people in these industries or allow those already in one trade to retrain into an emerging industry. It also explains why business owners tell me that the dropout rate for young staff is very high. With many businesses in key sectors having an average workforce age in their 60s, time is of the essence. In Fowler, many are having to look overseas to bring in skilled workers to make up the shortfall, and then they're faced with enormous compliance costs and time-consuming red tape—and, increasingly, green tape. This needs to be addressed urgently. In Fowler, we have amongst the highest rates of residents whose first language is not English and government support for English language competency is vital. The many refugees that have settled in Western Sydney could be a significant boost to employment in industry. What is being done to enable them to do this? We will certainly need new skills available to combat cybercrime to harness technology in developing businesses and for who knows what the future might bring. It's an uncertain time but also an exciting time. But what about other labour skills that are needed to kickstart our economy? The skills required to build houses, to fix your plumbing, to install your hot water system, to build pipes or to monitor a technology system at a water recycling plant, for example, are so hard to source. As I said, TAFE has played an important role in upskilling Australians. The provision of fee-free places is a great help in providing the opportunity, especially for those who are from lower socioeconomic and poorer areas, to be able to develop a meaningful career. That benefits all of us. But that doesn't mean that this bill should be waved through uncritically. The bill is heavily favourable to TAFE as a provider of vocational education and training. I'm concerned that other providers of VET might be left behind or unduly discriminated against, and I wonder if the minister can provide some reassurance that this is not the case. I can understand the practical benefit to governments in drafting free TAFE agreements with a single entity, but what is immediately easier is not always best in the long term. I'm of the firm belief that we shouldn't put all of our eggs into one basket. It doesn't bode well when public funds are just invested in one area that's proclaimed to be the cure to solving our workforce challenges. The government should balance its spending and ensure that reputable RTOs who can deliver specific industry needs be included in the vocational education and training funding. This is for both sides: I think, whenever one side comes in, it focuses on one area that's more aligned to its values and politics, and then another. We need to ensure that there is a balance in this so that we don't cut anybody out. I go back to the point—do not put all of your eggs in one basket to solve a problem. The government has already passed legislation targeting shonky RTO providers, and none of us want to see people getting away with exploiting customers or the taxpayer. But this legislation could lead to a favouring of TAFE over smaller providers of VET, and in Fowler there are many of them. Enabling industry to provide their own in-house VET training would be a real boost, as would providing accessible grants for research and development as they move into emerging markets. I've spoken to many businesses who have got specific skills needs in their industry, in their factories, that TAFE cannot provide but they can provide. Therefore, the government of the day needs to work with many of these industries in electorates like Fowler. My concern is not only for my electorate but for the general principle that it's best to have as much competition as possible in VET, to drive prices down and so that a wide variety of courses are available. In our exciting future, it's most likely that skilled areas will open up very quickly, requiring a nimble response in what might be very niche areas. Who in this House could have conceived or imagined, before 2016, the need to understand and use TikTok? Some members may have been here since the days of the telex machine! Another concern I have with this bill is that a primary objective is to enact ongoing funding for a government policy. Despite the Albanese government's huge popularity, there may well come a day when they lose power! There may even come a day when the party decides to change leadership and head in another direction. Like I said, there's an exciting future ahead! We all know that no government can bind an incoming government to spending commitments. This bill seeks to do just that, and any future government would have to repeal the legislation to make their own changes. What a waste of time and money. Why do you overcommit? Why do you commit to something when you don't know whether or not you'll be back to deliver it? The most important reason for wanting to be able to review fee-free TAFE in future funding would be following an evaluation of its success. I would like to know how successful fee-free TAFE provision has been for the past two years. Whilst many of the courses take three years to complete, many of them are six- to 12-month commitments. What has been the completion rate of the free courses that could be completed in six to 12 months? What has been the percentage dropout rate for all free courses started since its inception? I don't believe in a free lunch. I don't know that many people do. Anything that's for free sometimes does not actually deliver the outcomes. I'm a proud member for Fowler in Western Sydney, which we all know is the backbone of manufacturing. We are the major supplier of trades men and women in New South Wales. We are the engine of the state of New South Wales and no doubt the country. In funding the one entity, I'm concerned that many people will miss out on the opportunity to create a pathway to skill themselves if they fall through the cracks of TAFE. I support the principle of incentivising Australians to learn the skills and vocational training that our future demands. It is in all of our interests to do this. If the government can reassure me that this will be value for money and allow competition for non-TAFE RTOs, and show me that they are committed to more than the praising of TAFE, then I could be convinced to vote for the bill. TAFE has had and still has a significant role in the education and training of people who live and work in south-west and Western Sydney. So I welcome any focus that any government in Australia gives when it comes to investing in skills and training, especially of our labour workforce and in particular the young people in my electorate of Fowler and in south-west Sydney. 10:33 Mr KHALIL 101351 Wills The Labor government are all about opportunity. We are the party of opportunity. The Albanese government is the government of opportunity, and the Albanese Labor government believes in equality of opportunity. That starts with a good education for all. Every Australian, no matter their background or financial situation, should have equal access to education—no-one held back, no-one left behind. I'm here in this parliament today because my family and I were given a fair go under a number of visionary Labor policies, particularly around education. I'm the very proud son of Egyptian migrants who were very big on a good education to give us a go in life, and I received it in Australia. It allowed me to be standing here in the parliament today. I was able to, of course, get a good primary and secondary education, attend university and get the training I wanted, do postgrad studies and have a career that has spanned the private sector, the Public Service, business, politics of course, and so on. It was an education that opened up the doors of opportunity for me. It gave me the chance to make a contribution, as it has for millions of other Australians. The Albanese Labor government is committed to creating an aspirational and accessible education system so that no-one ever has to choose between an education and putting food on the table. We on this side of the House know that we have a responsibility to help people here and now and a duty to the next generation of Australians. I obviously feel this very deeply, given the impact it's had on my life, which is why I'm standing here talking about this really important bill, the Free TAFE Bill. This bill commits the Commonwealth to ongoing support to states and territories for free TAFE. Supporting the VET and TAFE sector is in Labor's DNA. Labor are reversing the damage of a decade and rebuilding TAFE for communities across Australia. The government has made a landmark $30 billion, five-year national skills agreement with states and territories, lifting investment in skills across Australia, alongside the Albanese government's growing investment in fee-free TAFE. We're also going after dodgy providers so that quality providers can do their work properly, because Labor knows that a reliable and trusted vocational education and training sector is critical for building our economy and creating a future made in Australia. TAFEs are trusted partners in this vision, driving quality improvements across the VET sector, leading on innovative teaching and learning practices, and assisting industries to develop skilled workforces. These things are critical. You can't have a strong VET sector without strong, public technical and further education, TAFE—we always use the acronym, but that's what TAFE stands for—at its heart. Labor's fee-free TAFE has already changed the lives of hundreds of thousands of Australians, providing cost-of-living relief and a pathway to well-paid and secure employment. In the first 18 months of fee-free TAFE there have been 508,000 enrolments. I want the opposition to think about that number: 508,000 additional enrolments. That means 508,000 Australians have an opportunity to get a quality education. Unlike those opposite, this Labor government will never consider fee-free TAFE to be, in the words of their deputy leader, wasteful spending. That's what she said, in this place. Mr Chester IPZ How many completed them? Mr KHALIL 101351 I'll take the interjection. She said in this place it was 'wasteful' spending. That's their kind of ideological view of education. That mob—the opposition—think spending on Australians who want to get by, get a quality education and get equality of opportunity to make a contribution to fulfil their potential is wasteful spending. In my community of Wills there are a number of incredible TAFE and vocational education campuses offering vital skills to support students and build the resilience and capacity of our nation. The electorate of Wills is also home to many staff and students in the VET sector, who have shared with me how important their vocational training has been. I had the privilege of meeting one of them this week in parliament. His name is Oisin. He was a Skillaroo recently, one of a group of remarkable young Australians who were selected to represent Australia at the WorldSkills international competition in Lyon, France. The WorldSkills international competition is the equivalent of the Olympics for skilled occupations. This year's competition hosted 1,400 competitors, from over 70 countries, competing in 59 skills in front of 250,000 visitors. Oisin was one of the 32 Australian Skillaroos and a recipient of the Cloud Computing Participation Award. Oisin went to TAFE and completed diplomas—I hope those opposite are listening—and with those diplomas went on to a bachelor's degree. One of his areas of study is information technology, specialising in cloud computing, which he was recognised for as a Skillaroo. Oisin is about to start his career as a public servant and will no doubt continue to contribute his skills and passion to our country. While Oisin's success in competing as a Skillaroo is a unique and remarkable achievement, Labor is committed to making his story, a story of education and equality of opportunity, an unremarkable tale. We want it to be the norm. They might bleat about it being wasteful spending to have 500,000 enrolments in TAFE, but it makes such a difference for the life of every one of those students. It could be a platform to go on to further education. It could be a platform to go on to do things like those that Oisin has done and make great achievements and a contribution to this country. We're introducing this bill so that more people can have opportunities and stories like Oisin's. We've partnered with states and territories through the Fee-Free TAFE Skills Agreement to deliver over $1.5 billion in funding for 500,000 free TAFE and VET places across Australia over the period 2023 to 2026. Half a million Australians will benefit from this. That's not wasteful spending in my book. That's an investment in the future of Australians. That's putting our trust in Australians to fulfil their potential through their educational journey. What makes a difference to this country is the vision to actually commit to Australians. Fee-free TAFE supports all these training places in the skills that we need in areas of high demand. It provides access to priority cohorts, including the most vulnerable, and it supports students by removing the financial barriers to study. That's not wasteful spending; that's an investment. Nine in 10 new jobs over the next 10 years will need postschool study, and half of those jobs will need vocational education and training. That's an investment in jobs for Australians as well. This bill ensures that free TAFE continues to deliver a coordinated response to workforce shortages in industries of local and national priority, helping build the pipeline of skilled workers that Australia needs now and into the future. That's not wasteful spending; it is an investment in Australia's future. While the bill sets out broad parameters, specific details will continue to be agreed through negotiations between the Commonwealth and the states. This legislation does not lock states into a fixed mode of delivering free TAFE. That's based on the flexibility of the Commonwealth and the states negotiating. Those opposite have made a few heckles during this speech. It's been a bit limited because they know that 500,000 Australians are going to get an opportunity to get an education, and that is a good thing—for them, for Australia's future, for the jobs market and for the skill shortages that we're facing. When the coalition and the Greens vote together to block legislation like this, they seem to be more concerned with their political skins or about making a point with some sort of short-term political hit or with their ideological agenda than about the future of this country. Rather than actually making an investment in Australians and their future through education, they've refused to back our additional fee-free TAFE and VET places for construction, which would expand access to new energy apprenticeships, expand capacity for training facilities and a trainer workforce, support women's careers in VET and increase financial support to priority apprentices and employees. What have you got against that? What possibly could be their opposition to investing in apprenticeships for women's careers and the training of a workforce to address skills shortage? I want to hear from those opposite what reason there could possibly be for them blocking this, apart from their political game playing, their voting with the Greens or whatever they're trying to do and whatever games are going on. They're not worried about the future of Australians, and they're not concerned about investment in Australians and their potential. They just want to play political games with this. When they were in government, the Liberals and Nationals actually cut $3 billion of funding from the VET system and from TAFE. That tells you that there's an ideological motivation: they just don't want to support and invest in Australia's education. They're not interested in that. They want to make it harder for Australians to access education, get the skills they want—and the skills Australia needs—so they can make the contribution to the country that comes from the equality of opportunity to getting an education. Education lifts people up and empowers them and gives them an opportunity to make a difference in their lives and in their communities. There's nothing that could be more impactful and more important than education. As I said, it is the key that opens the door to opportunity. It was the key that opened the door to my opportunity to actually make a contribution. If there's an ideological antagonism towards TAFEs or public TAFEs by the opposition, it's an ideological position. I get that. But I would say to the coalition, 'Don't you understand the value or the importance that strong TAFEs make to our local communities?' For all the reasons that I've just outlined, surely some of those opposite who have high levels of intelligence, and there are some—I'm looking at one right now, Member for Casey. Mr Chester IPZ He's not looking at me! Mr KHALIL 101351 I'm sorry, Darren. Surely they would understand the benefits that accrue, but it seems to me that they're out of touch with the needs of local communities and the needs of Australians. Labor knows that education is a right for all Australians; it's not just a privilege. It's not something that you can buy. Back in the fifties and sixties you had to have a lot of money to go to university, and it shut out 80 to 90 per cent of the population. I asked the great Bob Hawke, my predecessor in the seat of Wills, what was the most important thing that he'd done out of all the great things he'd done in the Labor government—the golden era of the Hawke and Keating governments—and he said, 'You know what? One of the things that is not talked about enough is the policies that we put in place. When I started, about 30 per cent of Australians finished year 12,' or matriculation, as they used to call it, but, because of the policy that Bob Hawke and the Labor government put in place, by the end of his time around 80 to 90 per cent of Australians were finishing year 12—secondary education. He was most proud of that, and that was a government that achieved a lot, so it tells you the importance that education has at the heart of our DNA and the commitment that we have to it as a party. Whether it's vocational, tertiary or other forms of studies, learning and training, Labor and the Albanese government are committed to making our educational system aspirational and accessible. That's why we have committed to wiping 20 per cent off student debt, improving the way payments are made, providing paid placements for a number of vocations and increasing wages for crucial sectors like aged care and child care. That's why we've introduced this visionary Free TAFE Bill—because it will make a difference to hundreds and thousands of Australians, who will open the door for their opportunity to make a contribution to this country. I would hope those opposite would see that and would come around and support this bill. 10:47 Mr VIOLI 300147 Casey I will thank the member for Wills for the compliment. I'll take that. I was actually—it's unintended, but it's a good segue—going to start my speech by talking about the importance of education. I've spoken about this from my first speech in this House. When I spoke about education in my first speech, I spoke about the opportunity it created for me. It helped me build the life that I have today and the life that my family have, and with the contribution I'm able to make in this role. I also spoke about an education system that is focused on delivering outcomes for students—delivering outcomes to set them up for success into the future. The debate and the discussion we are having, and the vote we are having, are not about whether we support education; everyone in this House supports a strong education system. The debate and the discussion that we need to have are around the detail, around whether this bill—this policy—is the best use of taxpayer money to deliver educational outcomes for students. TAFE is an important part of our education system. I was just on the phone about 15 minutes ago to my best friend, Glen, who's an electrician. He runs his own business now. He went through the TAFE system 20-plus years ago; he's getting old, like we all are. He wouldn't be able to run the business he has today and he wouldn't be able to employ people or help apprentices without TAFE. So we're not disputing the importance of TAFE and the role it plays. But, as he said to me—and he made a really good point—everyone that wants to be in a trade, be it electrical or plumbing, needs to go. They're required to do it, absolutely, but also, if they don't have the means, there are systems in place for them to get access to that TAFE, so money isn't an impact if they have that desire. It does feel a little bit like Groundhog Day 2½ years into this. It was one of my favourite movies growing up back in the day, with Bill Murray as Phil Connors living that same day over and over again. Sometimes when we're in this House, when we listen to the speeches from those opposite and the bills that come in, it feels like Groundhog Day because it follows that same theme of the very catchy title that sounds really good, good spin and good lines for them but then goes to the detail. The detail is always lacking, and the process is lacking. We're at Groundhog Day; I feel like I'm going through that. For Phil Connors in Groundhog Day, by the end of the movie the big outcome for him was that he'd grown, he'd learned, he'd developed, he'd become a better person. Unfortunately, 2½ years into the first term of the Albanese Labor government, they're still at day one. They're still at day one of the spin and the big headlines but no detail and no process. I'm going to go through and explain some of the concerns. Take the headline, for example. Let's be really clear. It's not free TAFE. It is funded by taxpayers. For every decision we make in this House, it's not the government's money. It's not the opposition's money. It's taxpayer money. So we are asking Australians to invest in something and use their money. Someone has to pay for it. What that means is that, when we spend taxpayer money, we have to make sure it's the best use of that money. There is a great economic term called 'opportunity cost'. Every business, every family, every community organisation and every government has to recognise the opportunity cost of how they spend their money. Now, this government spends like it's not going to run out. We saw that today. When you get desperate, you have to make decisions like removing the independence of the Future Fund. You need to start using that independent organisation's money on your own priorities, and that is an economic decision that will haunt this nation and this government for years to come. The Future Fund was an important independent organisation. But it shows that money doesn't grow on trees and you have to spend it wisely. We saw the Treasurer finally yesterday have to admit that the two surpluses that he delivered were not about making choices or tough decisions. They were all on the revenue upgrades that had come over the last two years. As he said in his own words yesterday: In each of our 4 budget updates there were $80 billion in revenue upgrades, on average. But with the labour market softening around the edges, this trend is diminishing. He also said: This has been compounded by structural challenges in the Chinese economy weighing on key commodity prices – iron ore prices are down 30 per cent since the start of the year. As a result of these factors, I can inform the House that Treasury expects any revenue upgrades in the mid‑year outlook will be much smaller. The Treasurer himself has confirmed that his two surpluses that he likes to talk about were not because of the tough choices that he made but the revenue upgrades driven by iron ore and minerals. The unemployment rate that he inherited from the former Treasurer, Josh Frydenberg—he was very happy at the start of the pandemic to say the success of the former Treasurer was unemployment. He didn't talk about unemployment when he inherited such a low rate. He also doesn't talk about how inflation, while it hurts the family budget, actually helps the government budget. This is crucial when we have this discussion, because we need to make choices. We need to understand whether this money is the best money, and so we look at the policy process that this government has gone through. There has been no performance review on the first round of the fee-free TAFE policy that this government has put forward. The first review will not be complete until June of 2025. So the government are prepared to use scarce resources from the taxpayer to double-down on a policy without even reviewing whether it is the best use of that money. I'm just going to give a comparison because, as I said, opportunity cost is important. We can talk about the supposed fee-free TAFE, which is actually taxpayer funded TAFE, but these are the other policies that currently aren't being funded by the government. On Monday night this week, as the co-chair of the Parliamentary Friends of Youth Mental Health, I was proud to host Raise. Raise is an organisation that mentors young people in schools, and its funding from the department of health runs out in December this year. But Raise has done the right thing. Raise has undertaken an independent evaluation through the University of Melbourne and the Social Outcomes Lab. That independent evaluation has shown that their mentoring service delivers $4.37 in social benefits for every dollar invested. As I said, Raise is still unfunded beyond December this year. But they've got a proposal with the department of health. But it gets even better; the offer from Raise to the Australian government is even better than that. Not only does Raise's mentoring deliver $4.37 per dollar invested; Raise have committed publicly to gaining, for every dollar of federal government funding, another $2 from their own corporate partnerships and private donors. This is the comparison we have with a government that is happy to commit significant taxpayer money with no savings offered to offset it. We're going to see the Treasurer bring down a budget next year—we'll see; that's in debate—and we're going to see four years of deficits, because the revenues have dropped. But he and the government are prepared to commit this money today without offering any savings to the budget. Unfortunately, as the Treasurer said, his luck has run out—the revenues aren't there. I'll be watching whether the Minister for Health and Aged Care commits to this funding, because if the government have so much money to commit to taxpayer funded TAFE then I'm sure there should be no problem finding the $2 million to $3 million that Raise wants, given the opportunities that are there and the evaluations this process has undergone, which this bill and this policy haven't. When we look at the evaluation, we see these are the questions the government should be talking about. They're going to talk a lot about enrolments. They will all talk about enrolments—the member for Wills talked about enrolments. Obviously, it's important that people are enrolling, but, again, if you're going to spend taxpayer money you should be asking yourself other questions. What's the targeted graduation rate—that is, what graduation rate is the government trying to achieve based on the number of enrolments? If you don't have a target, you're never going to hit it. Enrolling is great, but do you know what's even better, Deputy Speaker? Graduating and getting a job. That should be the focus—on the outcome. The other thing we need to look at is not the top-line number of how many people have enrolled based on this taxpayer funded subsidy but how many new students are enrolling because of this new policy. There will be situations where people were already going to enrol in TAFE. They might want to be an electrician—let's use electricians as an example. Their parents could be earning half a million dollars each. They could be really well off in the corporate sector and happy to pay for their child's TAFE. But now we're asking taxpayers on $60,000 a year to fund that. We need to understand the incremental gains, particularly in the areas of skills shortage, and then look at how many people have completed the course and what the outcome is. As I said—and this is an important one—it should be enrolments, completions and employment: how many people are actually employed in their field of study and whether it is making a tangible difference. As I said at the start of my speech, I believe in education as an opportunity for all—but an opportunity and a system that is focused on delivering educational, employment and social outcomes for the community and for students. But if we actually look at the economics behind this policy that those opposite talk about, there are a few awkward details here, or rather a lack of details. As the member for Wills said, the detail still apparently needs to be worked out. I have spoken about the opportunity costs. But the government have found an amazing way to get around that. They've simply just not funded the project. They've decided not to fund it. As page 3 of the explanatory memorandum states: There is no financial impact resulting from the Free TAFE Bill 2024. The bill also says 'may not be free'. So the course may actually not be free. I must admit that I'm very confused about those opposite standing up, talking about how the government and the taxpayer are going to subsidise these TAFE places when their own explanatory memorandum says that the bill has actually got no financial impact. So I'm looking forward to those opposite explaining how you can provide a taxpayer subsidised education course to students when it's actually going to have no financial impact. I know my good friend the member for Parramatta, who's an economist, is in the chamber. I don't think he's up next; I think he's on chamber duty. But, if he hasn't spoken, I would love the member for Parramatta, as an economist, to explain how taxpayers can subsidise a program that will have no financial impact. Even the bill says that it 'may not be free'. So it's about the headline again—groundhog day—the spin and the optics of having the Free TAFE Bill 2024. It sounds very impressive, because the government know students and they know when they put the clips out on social media that no-one's actually going to go to the bill and read, in its own words, 'may not be free'. But the headline is: 'Free TAFE Bill 2024'! I'm looking forward to seeing all the social media clips coming out about the coalition—rah-rah-rah. But look at the detail. We're at groundhog day. It may not be free! That is the problem for the Albanese Labor government. As with many other bills that we debate in this House, 2½ years into this government, the Prime Minister talks a big game. The Treasurer, with his PhD in political science, can spin numbers. He can spin the revenue upgrades; although he's run out now, because this is the reality: you can talk a good game, but if you don't deliver it, the Australian people notice. The Australian people understand that saying something is one thing, but actually doing it and delivering outcomes for the Australian people is the most important thing. As you go through this bill, when you look at the detail, it's not going to deliver to the Australian people. (Time expired) 11:03 Ms CLAYDON 248181 Newcastle I rise to strongly support this important piece of legislation, the Free TAFE Bill 2024, introduced by my good friend and colleague the Minister for Skills and Training. For decades, TAFE has been the cornerstone of vocational education in Australia. It has provided generations of Australians with the skills, qualifications and pathways they need to enter secure, well-paid jobs and build successful careers. In my electorate of Newcastle, I am lucky enough to represent three Hunter TAFE campuses. These institutions have been a constant source of the provision of essential skills and qualifications to thousands of Novocastrians from all walks of life since 1896! The member who spoke before me might want to contemplate what it is like to have TAFE institution for more than 136 years in your electorate and the extraordinary work and upskilling that that has provided, not just for individuals but for the strengthening of our local economies. Whether it's pursuing a trade, learning a new technical skill or exploring a pathway to higher ed, TAFE is there, providing accessible, high-quality education to help take that next step. And the people of Newcastle have a deep respect for the vital role that TAFE plays in providing vocational education and training in our region and in the strengthening of our local economy. TAFE's hands-on approach to learning, connection to industry and ability to adapt to the ever-changing demands of the workforce have made it an indispensable resource. As of last year, the three TAFE campuses in Newcastle were providing education to a phenomenal 64,000 students. The top five of the most popular fields of study are engineering and all the related technologies there; management and commerce; society and culture; food, hospitality and personal services; and education. These are all critical industries that we know keep our nation moving. Their future success and contributions to Australia can be attributed to the education and training they have received at TAFE. With all that in mind, why wouldn't we want to encourage everyone to have a shot at TAFE without those financial barriers in place? Through the Free TAFE Bill 2024, the Albanese Labor government is seeking to transform the lives of Australians and the future of our economy. At the heart of this bill is a fundamental principle—that access to education and training should not be determined by your financial situation. Labor is committed to building a fairer, more inclusive Australia by ensuring that anyone who wants to develop the skills and qualifications needed to thrive in the workforce has the opportunity to do so—for free. We know how important free TAFE is to Australia. Free TAFE has changed the lives of hundreds of thousands of Australians providing cost-of-living relief and a pathway to well-paid secure employment. In the first 18 months of free TAFE under this government, there have been 508,000 enrolments in courses in priority areas. That means 131,000 people into care, including disability and aged care; 48,900 into digital and tech; 35,000 into construction; and 35,500 into early childhood and care. Free TAFE has particularly benefited Australians from priority cohorts, with over 170,000 young Australians, 124,000 jobseekers and 30,000 First Nations Australians enrolling in the program. Of all places, six in 10 have been taken up by women. This is remarkable. These are opportunities for people who were generally cut out from access because of the financial barriers that were in place until the Albanese Labor government brought about fee-free TAFE. One of those remarkable women who took up a fee-free place in my electorate is Kahlia. She's a small-business owner, beauty therapist and mother of three. Thanks to free TAFE, Kahlia completed a certificate IV in assessment and training and is now living out her goal of being a TAFE teacher in beauty therapy. She's putting her decades and decades of skills to fantastic work, training the next generation of remarkable beauty therapists. Kahlia told me that with three kids, including one with special needs, she doesn't have a lot of free time on her hands, but the flexibility offered by an online free TAFE course and not having to worry about the cost allowed her the confidence to back herself and to take that leap. Kahlia is one of many Newcastle women who have shared their stories with me about their new career paths thanks to free TAFE, and free TAFE has absolutely exceeded expectations. The existing program is set to cease on 31 December 2026, and this legislation is aimed squarely at making free TAFE permanent and supporting at least 100,000 places a year every year across the nation from 2027 onwards. The first and most immediate effect of the Free TAFE Bill is the empowerment it gives to individuals. We know education is a powerful tool. It is life changing. It's something that changes lives and open doors, and for too long many Australians have been held back because of the rising cost of vocational education and training. The Free TAFE Bill 2024 removes this financial barrier, giving people from all backgrounds the chance to acquire skills that are essential to their personal and professional development. The value of free TAFE is immense. It means that Australians no longer need to take on significant debt or make sacrifices to gain qualifications needed for in-demand jobs. Whether it's a young person leaving high school, a mid-career professional wanting to upskill or someone looking to change careers entirely, free TAFE opens a clear and accessible pathway. No longer will people be forced to choose between pursuing their passion and paying off their education. This bill creates equal opportunities. It empowers people, as I said, to make choices based on their ambitions and talents and to not have to worry about financial limitations. Second, there are, of course, tremendous benefits for the economy. We know that our economy thrives on the fact that we have a highly skilled workforce, but we know we have tremendous labour shortage areas because those opposite, frankly, had no interest in TAFE. They sat back, watching it be ground to its knees in most states and territories, and that is the mess we have inherited. But we are absolutely determined to rebuild TAFE because we know that, when people gain qualifications and enter the workforce, they make a tremendous contribution to the nation's economy through their higher earnings and their greater consumption as well. More Australians with higher paying jobs means greater tax revenue as well for governments, as well as reduced reliance on social welfare. These are great benefits for our community. So the investment that we make in free TAFE now well and truly pays for itself in people with good jobs who are paying more taxes and fewer people dependent on social security. So, when members opposite dare describe this as a waste of money, I want them to reflect on that. Third, TAFE is a really essential part of building a fairer and more equitable society in the first place. In Australia, like in many countries, the cost of education can be a significant obstacle for many people from disadvantaged backgrounds. We want to bust those barriers down. Fee-free TAFE provides a level playing field for those who might otherwise be excluded from TAFE. I cannot overstate how important it is to make sure that we get women in traditionally male-dominated trades, that we're getting First Nations people every opportunity to have a well-paid job in a great skill-based sector and that people with disability are also getting access to a quality education and gaining the skills that they need to succeed. This is what the free TAFE courses are providing. Of course, in the end this is really all about being able to contribute also to a cohesive society where everybody feels like they've got a stake in the nation's future. Supporting VET and TAFE is part of Labor's DNA. We all come from electorates where the vocational education and training sector is critical to our communities. I'm absolutely stunned that the National Party as coalition members wouldn't want to support this bill, because in their communities, like my region, that is where higher education takes place—through a grounded TAFE system. We've already made a landmark $30 billion five-year National Skills Agreement with the states and territories, lifting the investment in skills across Australia, alongside our investment into free TAFE. This landmark agreement includes the rollout of a number of net zero manufacturing centres of excellence, including one in my electorate of Newcastle. These centres represent not only a bold vision for the future of sustainable manufacturing but also a commitment to innovation, education and the communities that depend on these industries. As Australia faces the challenge of reducing our carbon emissions and transitioning to a net zero economy by 2050, the need for leadership, skills and technological innovation in our manufacturing sector has never been more urgent. The establishment of these centres of manufacturing excellence marks a pivotal moment in our commitment to clean energy, to cutting-edge technology, to job creation and to skills development. The people of Newcastle and the Hunter know how deadly serious this government is about investing in our manufacturing sector as a whole and investing into the upskilling of each and every one of our citizens. On top of our demonstration of how government, industry and education can all work together to create a better, more sustainable future, the Albanese Labor government is also investing $91 million in skilling the new energy workforce for the transition to net zero, another $91 million to help in skilling the housing and construction workforce, $55.6 million for building women's careers programs, $265 million to provide additional targeted support under the Australian Apprenticeships Incentive System and almost $28 million to improve tertiary collaboration and lay the foundations for broader tertiary education reforms. We've still got some work to do in that transition and interface between TAFE and universities, but that is absolutely in this government's focus. When Labor came to government, it was clear that not only had we inherited the $1 trillion of Liberal debt—so it's astonishing to hear those opposite still try to talk like they're good economic managers—but we were also left with this massive skills shortage. The OECD said that Australia had the second highest labour shortage per capita amongst all our comparable OECD countries. With a record like that, honestly, members opposite should be jumping on board to support this bill. It is going to be great news for those National Party seats. You know, like I know, TAFE is the backbone of the tertiary education systems in your electorates. The idea that you would want to deny your constituents access to a quality education and remove the financial barriers from that is astonishing. I don't know how you're going to go back to your electorates and explain it; I honestly don't. I don't have time to go through the track record of those opposite on TAFE, but let it be said it has been appalling. This Labor government will stand up for investment into public education. We will ensure increased access to TAFE by removing all financial obstacles to do so. We need these projects to all be up and running to deal with the housing crisis, to deal with the transition to clean economies, to ensure that women are getting into those well-paid male-dominated trade industries. That's what free TAFE is doing. That is the change and power of this. I'm sorry, but those TAFE grinches opposite really need to take a look at how they cast their vote and how they explain that to their constituents. (Time expired) 11:18 Mr CHESTER IPZ Gippsland If we cast our mind back to a former British Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, she actually said once something which is quite pertinent to today's debate. She said, 'The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.' That really is at the core of today's debate on the Free TAFE Bill 2024. 'The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.' Those opposite are trying to establish some phoney fault lines in this building to suggest that people on this side of the House don't support education, to suggest that people on this side of the House don't support vocational training or university education, to suggest that people on this side of the House don't recognise that a good education is a pathway to a better-paying job and economic success for an individual. That fault line doesn't exist. There is not a member in this place, on either side of the chamber or on the crossbench, who doesn't value education, who hasn't benefited from Australia's world-class education system in one way or another. And there's not a person in this place who doesn't want to see young Australians achieve their full potential. But there are people in this place who understand the value of taxpayers' money. There are people in in place who understand that nothing is actually ever free. It's always someone else's money, and in this case the someone else whose money is to pay for Labor's reckless promise is the Australian taxpayer. 'The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.' Now, we have obligations in this place for those of us who have been lucky enough, as I have, to have served in the cabinet and served in portfolios where we've had responsibility for the taxpayers' money. I had obligations to make sure that, wherever possible, I achieved value for money for the Australian taxpayers. I understand how hard Australians work for their money. I understand that, when they give their taxes to the government, they expect us to work just as hard to get value for money for the dollars they're contributing. There are limited resources. The member for Casey touched on this in his presentation when he said there's an opportunity cost here. The money you spend in one part of government business is an opportunity cost for potential expenditure in another part, whether it's offering services or critical infrastructure in our communities. What we have here is the government seeking to create a false fault line in the building when it could be working with those on this side of the House and providing more transparency and a better system which we could vote to support. My main concerns with the bill before the House relate directly to transparency, relate to fairness and relate to the fact that this is not actually targeted in a way that Australian taxpayers' dollars should be targeted: at the most vulnerable and most disadvantaged. It doesn't take any consideration of an individual's capacity to pay. For example, if I or someone like me were to undertake a TAFE course under the Labor approach, I'd get a fee-free course. I have more than enough capacity to pay for the course. Why would I get a fee-free course? On this fairness debate, think about a cleaner. They are some of the hardest-working Australians but not really well paid; an average wage for a cleaner in Australia might be about $60,000 a year. Why should a cleaner who hasn't had the advantages of a university education or a TAFE course pay the TAFE fees of a plumber or an electrician? The plumber has the capacity. On average wages, they make $87,000 a year. An electrician's average wage in Australia is currently $94,000 a year. So why are the taxes of a cleaner on $58,000 a year going to pay the fee-free TAFE of a plumber or electrician? I've got to say that not once in my 16 years in this place has a plumber or an electrician come to me and said: 'You know what? The money I spent on my training was a waste of money.' They know it's an investment in their own future. They're quite happy to pay for the skills and training they need knowing full well that they will benefit from that training in the years ahead. It's an investment in themselves. Those plumbers, those electricians, who have some limited capacity to pay at the time of their study have access to other systems already where they can delay the payment. We have a very advanced system in Australia where you can delay the payment for the course itself. I want to re-emphasise this. There is not a person in this place who doesn't believe that we should be investing in our young people or that we should be investing in educational opportunities, whether it's through TAFE, VET or on to university, but we on this side of the House want to make sure that we're getting value for money for the Australian taxpayers' dollars, because nothing is ever free. Someone else is always paying. The fact that this bill does not provide any provision to assess an individual's capacity to pay, to contribute to their own education, is a fundamental flaw with the bill before the House. Unfortunately, this government has form in relation to writing blank cheques and expecting other people to pay. This is another cynical vote-buying exercise aimed at younger voters. What we've seen in the last couple of weeks is that this government has finally realised that cost of living is an issue for the Australian people. It's woken up to the fact after 2½ years and after wasting more than $400 million on a referendum. They finally realise that cost of living is a big issue. Their first response was to come out with a vote-buying scheme targeted so cynically that it disproportionally benefits young people and people who graduated with a degree in inner urban areas at the expense of working-class people in regional areas. I'm referring specifically to the announcement that the government will pay $16 billion to reduce student HELP debts by 20 per cent. The reason this bill is very similar to the one before the House today, and is so egregious, is that when I asked the Parliamentary Library—a very independent source—for a breakdown on who this will benefit the most—what a surprise! The seats that will benefit the most from this $16 billion are either held by the Labor Party and are under direct threat from the Greens or are held by the Greens themselves and are Labor Party target seats. The Parliamentary Library data is so unequivocally damning of this plan that I am surprised that there hasn't been more outrage over it. For example, this proposal will benefit 12,777 people in the seat of Gippsland. It's good for them. They'll get that 20 per cent reduction. But, in the Prime Minister's seat of Grayndler, it will help 28,009 students—that's more than double. In the education minister's seat of Blaxland, it's 25,901. Remember, it's 12,000 in Gippsland, 25,000 in the education minister's seat, and 28,000 in the Prime Minister's seat. It gets worse, because across Australia, when you average out the seats held by the National Party—obviously rural and regional seats—the average number of students across all National Party seats who will benefit from this debt retirement at taxpayers' expense is 13,384. But, when you average out the seats held by the Greens, the target seats for the Australian Labor Party, in the inner city, which is where they're obviously hoping to make some ground at the next election, what do you think the number would be, Member for Nicholls? Would it be more or less? Mr Birrell 288713 I'm worried it's going to be more. Mr CHESTER IPZ In seats held by the Greens, the average is 32,288. That's almost 2½ times the number. This is a disgusting use of taxpayers' money to cynically try and buy votes in the city, and those opposite know it. This gets us right back to the bill before the House today. This government wants to write blank cheques with other people's money to try to buy votes of the younger people in Australia with no regard whatsoever for the fact that somebody always has to pay for their promises. One of the most interesting aspects of the debate before the House is that Labor takes great pride in saying that 508,000 students have taken on fee-free enrolments during their time in government. That's an impressive number. But what we've been asking of the government is: how many of those students who have taken advantage of a fee-free TAFE course have finished the course? That's a reasonable question. Is it 50 per cent, 90 per cent or 20 per cent? Because how could you decide to extend a program unless you'd measured it, reviewed it, assessed its success and decided that this is a program that is worthy of continuing or maybe we need to tweak it a bit. Mr Birrell 288713 It's called 'evaluation'. Mr CHESTER IPZ The member for Nicholls is right. It's called evaluation. It's also called—for a minister—taking responsibility for the use of taxpayers' money and ensuring that you achieve the best possible outcome for the hardworking Australians who have contributed tax in the first place and expect you to work just as hard to ensure you achieve value for money with the dollars they contribute to the overall revenue of the Commonwealth. There have been 508,000 fee-free enrolments during the time of government, but no data has been provided to members on this side of the House in relation to the completion rates. This is a bit mischievous, at best, by the government, because we heard in Senate estimates that that data has been made available. While the minister comes in here and claims it takes four years to get usable data, it was actually confirmed in Senate estimates that he regularly receives a report on fee-free TAFE numbers, with the latest current data provided on 30 June 2024. Data is provided to the minister's office every three months. So why is he coming in here and saying it takes four years to get usable data? Why is he saying that? Has he misspoken? I hope he hasn't misled the House; that would be an appalling state of affairs. If there are 508,000 people who have had the advantage of fee-free TAFE, surely the Australian taxpayers have every right to know how many of those students have completed their course, are still making progress on their course or have dropped out. If I was a minister and making commitments with hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayers' money, I'd want to know: 'Has it worked? Has this been a good program?' Surely you'd be calling in the secretary of the department and bureaucrats, and saying: 'Hey, team, 508,000 people have enrolled. Fee-free enrolments seems to be a very successful program. A lot of people have turned up. But how many of them have actually completed their course?' This is the critical aspect of it. There is no transparency in the debate. This is all about trying to buy the votes of young people and then masquerading in here that there's some sort of fault line with those on that side caring much more about education than those on this side, who apparently don't care. That's just not the truth. These are reasonable questions for the minister to answer: Why won't he give us the data on completion rates? Why isn't fee-free TAFE specifically targeted at the most vulnerable, disadvantaged Australians? And why isn't there at least some consideration on an individual's capacity to pay? If you can afford to contribute to your own education in some shape or form, then, surely, you should, because that gives the government more money to help more vulnerable people in the first place. Right throughout their presentations today, those opposite have belled the cat. They've come out and told us that if you do a TAFE or university course you'll earn more money across your life. If you're going to benefit financially so significantly, why should the taxes of the cleaner I talked about earlier—on $58,000 a year, with no access to further training or earning extra income—go to making education free for someone who's going to earn probably twice as much in their career? It fails the test of fairness, fails the test of transparency and fails the test of value for money for Australian taxpayers. I urge the minister: instead of trying to create false fault lines around education, come in here and tell the truth. What has been the completion rate of the 508,000 fee-free TAFE enrolments in this term of government? How many people have completed their courses? How many are progressing successfully through their courses, and how many have dropped out? We will then be in a better position, on both sides of the House, to evaluate the proposal put before us. But there is no way those of us on this side of the House are going to give this government a blank cheque to go out and try and cynically buy more votes of young Australians and show no respect to the Australian taxpayers who work damn hard for their money and expect ministers to work just as hard. 11:33 Ms FERNANDO 299964 Holt I am a proud product of the TAFE system, as are more than 5½ thousand people living within the electorate of Holt. My journey to this House was shaped by my early years as a shop assistant, where I stacked shelves and navigated the aisles of various Woolies stores across the south-eastern suburbs of Melbourne. Thanks to the TAFE sector I was able to upskill and pursue my passion in culinary arts. I earned a certificate III in commercial cookery from Box Hill TAFE and diplomas in hospitality management and patisserie from William Angliss Institute. This allowed me to pursue my passion of baking and to move into the bakery department at Woolworths. This change in position increased my hourly wage by a few dollars and gave me a sense of security knowing that I was skilled in a trade. My story is like so many more from the community I so proudly represent. As I look to the future, over 90 per cent of jobs will require tertiary qualification. For millions of Australians these skills cannot come from universities. Instead, it is only the hands-on experience that TAFE can provide that will give them the training they need to launch their careers. This is why the Albanese Labor government is committed to strengthening our education system and rebuilding Australia's TAFE sector. We know that the Liberal-National opposition has consistently undermined TAFE, seeking to privatise it at the state level and washing their hands of responsibility at the federal level. When we came to government we inherited a TAFE system on the brink of collapse. It was a system devastated by a decade of neglect under the former government. Unlike the Liberals, we do not see TAFE as a nuisance or as something less than a university degree. We see TAFE and vocational education as essential to the future of our workforce. TAFE is vital for boosting productivity, addressing skill shortages and ensuring every Australian has the opportunity to climb the social and economic ladder. A recent report by Jobs and Skills Australia highlighted the transformative power of TAFE. On average, TAFE graduates see their annual wages increase by $11,800, and 39 per cent of graduate no longer relied on income support. These are life-changing outcomes that improve not only financial security but also overall quality of life for individuals and their families. As someone who has lived on a minimum wage for more than 15 years, I know how much of a difference this kind of financial stability can make. This is why I am proud to be part of a government that champions free TAFE for Australia. In just 18 months Labor's free TAFE initiative has led to more than 508,000 enrolments. This program is creating hundreds of thousands of opportunities for people across the nation, including in our local community. Recently, with the Minister for Skills and Training, Andrew Giles, I visited Chisholm TAFE in Cranbourne to meet some of these students and hear their stories. One of them was Zainab, a refugee from Afghanistan who is currently studying English. She told me how she plans to pursue aged-care training after completing her course so that she can give back to the country that has welcomed her. Another student, Dylan, is father to a young child and is studying horticulture. He shared how free TAFE gave him the chance to upskill and secure a better-paid job. Dylan also told me that he couldn't risk being in debt for $30,000 while raising a child and, thanks to Labor's free TAFE, he doesn't have to. Then there's Evie, who left school in year 10 and worked in her family's business for years. Now she's pursuing a TAFE qualification, with the dream of starting her own business. It is hard to fathom how the Liberal Party can sit across from us and label free TAFE as 'wasteful spending'. Stories like Zainab's, Dylan's and Evie's are proof of why our government is committed to free TAFE. This program is not just about education; it's about transforming lives, breaking down barriers and opening the doors to success for Australians from all walks of life. This is why I'm proud to stand here today and announce that Labor will make free TAFE permanent. From 2027 onwards, Labor will fund more than 100,000 free TAFE places every year. Let me say that again: we are making free TAFE permanent for over 100,000 Australians every single year. Free TAFE is already providing a pipeline of work to crucial industries, with over 130,000 enrolments in the care sector, over 35,000 in the early childhood sector and almost 35,000 enrolments in the construction sector. This program is addressing workforce shortages in national priority areas. It is training the carers we need to support our aging parents. It is training the educators we need to care for our children while we work. It is training the plumbers and bricklayers we need to build houses and address the housing shortage. It is training the electricians and solar installers we need to power Australia's renewable energy transition. Victoria, my home state, has been leading the way on free TAFE. Since 2019, a state-run program has been in place and its success is clear. The Victoria Skills Plan estimates that, of the 350,000 new workers needed in our state between 2023 and 2026, nearly half will require a TAFE qualification. While the Liberals call free TAFE wasteful spending, they have no plans to address our workforce shortage, they want to get rid of free TAFE, they want to block Labor's student debt relief and they want to make it more expensive for every Australian to gain the skills they need for a secure and well-paid job. And once they make it harder to access education, they will overturn workplace rights and push your wages down. The Liberals claim to care about the cost of living, but they have shown us no solution. This bill ensures federal funding for states and territories to deliver these free-TAFE places. Agreements with the Commonwealth will set clear terms, including the number of places, areas of study, priority groups, reporting requirements and financial arrangements. These agreements will ensure transparency and accountability, while delivering the skills Australians need to thrive. This builds on the National Skills Agreement, which was signed by the former minister Brendan O'Connor and his state and territory counterparts last year. This agreement represents a $12.6 billion investment into TAFE by the Albanese Labor government. This funding is aimed at addressing crucial and future needs in Australia's workforce, including to support a future made in Australia, the net zero transformation, construction and housing supply, the care and support economy, defence manufacturing and digital capability. We are investing $325 million in establishing a network of national TAFE centres of excellence to promote best practices in education and training. We are investing $100 million to support the growth and retention of a high quality workforce. We are investing over $250 million to support students to complete their qualification, with a specific emphasis on supporting women and those from marginalised backgrounds. Labor's free TAFE initiative is not just an investment in education; it's an investment in people, communities and the future of our great nation. Free TAFE is about giving Australians the tools to build lives for themselves and their families. It's about addressing skill shortages, strengthening our economy and ensuring that no one is left behind. I know the impact that TAFE can have on someone's life and I know that, for every Zainab, Dylan and Evie, Labor's commitment to TAFE means opportunity and a better future. This is what Labor stands for: a government that invests in people, values education and delivers on its promise. I am proud to be part of a government that is making free TAFE permanent—a government that believes in the life changing power of education and skills. Let us continue building a stronger, fairer and more prosperous Australia together. Thank you to the Minister for Skills and Training, Andrew Giles, and his predecessor, the Hon. Brendan O'Connor, for your hard work and advocacy for free TAFE. I commend this bill to the House. 11:44 Mr BIRRELL 288713 Nicholls I too rise to speak on the Free TAFE Bill 2024. It's always interesting in this place, the people who come up with the names of bills, like a headline writer in a newspaper. 'Free TAFE Bill' sounds great; it sounds fantastic—free! It probably should be called 'the taxpayer funded TAFE bill' or the 'free for some but not for others TAFE bill'. I want to talk a bit about how I think TAFE can be better and how we can move forward as a country by making education and TAFE better, based on some experiences I've had overseas, and also talk about that concept we have of 'free'. What is 'free'? It's great when you go down to the pub and someone's put on free beer. It might be free for us, but someone, somewhere, has paid, because everything has a cost, and that cost has to be borne somewhere. It is the same for free parking or whatever it is. The reality is that, for everything we do, for all the decisions we make in this place, a cost is borne in almost every case by the Australian taxpayer. So, calling something free is a misnomer. The cost is borne by the Australian taxpayer. I come from a very entrepreneurial place. Nicholls is made up of people who often came from a long way across the world throughout history, to make a better life. They've worked incredibly hard, often working on farms and then buying their own farms and setting up food manufacturing businesses. And people work in those food manufacturing businesses. People set up businesses. We're not really a taxpayer funded region like, might I say, the great city of Canberra, where a lot of people are paid for by the taxpayer. We come from a place where people make their own money through their ingenuity and their effort. Those people, because they work so hard to make it and put so much of their own risk to make it, are really interested in how governments spend that money, and those people are pretty concerned with the way governments are spending it at the moment. I can't tell you how many taxpayers called me, even though it's a state issue, to tell me how hard they work to pay tax, only to see the Victorian Labor government flush $589 million of it down the toilet on a Commonwealth Games that was planned for and is not going to happen. The taxpayers in my electorate, who, as the member for Gippsland said, worked damned hard for that, are very annoyed that government incompetence could lead to that much wastage. I and many people in my electorate are the beneficiaries of education, and a lot of people in this place are the beneficiaries of education, and everyone in this place really supports education. The member for Gippsland was right when he talked about the fact that this attempt to make a fault line between them caring about education and us not caring is ridiculous. Many of us have benefited from education. I've attempted three degrees, and I've graduated with two of them. My first one didn't work out, but I did have to pay; I had to pay for not completing that course—and I'll come back to that a bit later. I was working on a farm in the nineties and I realised I wanted to move forward in my career in agriculture and that I needed more agricultural education, so I went and did a degree in agricultural science at the University of Melbourne. I took up what was then known as a HECS loan. That's a great agreement with the government where they say, 'Sam, we're going to invest in your education, and when you start earning down the track as a result of our investment, you can pay back that loan.' And I did that. It took me a little while, but I did it. Many years later, I wanted to get educated again, so I went to La Trobe University, which, fortunately for me, has a regional campus. I wanted to do an MBA. Again, the government said, 'Sam, we're prepared to invest in your education by giving you, but you've got a capacity to pay, so we're going to get you to pay it back.' At that time, it was called a FEE-HELP loan. That effort of mine to get educated, earn more money and then pay it back into the pool helped other people who did not have a capacity to pay immediately. I did my MBA and I paid that one off quicker because I was earning more money by that stage. I think a responsible government has got to look at how things are funded. Responsible governments, in the past, have looked at university. Do we have university that is just open slather and free for everyone or do we have an arrangement where we invest in you, but when you've got a capacity to pay it back, you do that. That's what a responsible government does. I am interested to know, too, where exactly the funds are coming from this so-called free or—as I should say—taxpayer-funded TAFE, because page 3 of the Explanatory Memorandum of the Free TAFE Bill states, 'There is no financial impact resulting from the Free TAFE Bill 2024.' This sounds like magic pudding stuff to me. You're going to make something free, but that thing has a cost which you'll shift to somewhere—but then you're saying there is no financial impact. I don't quite understand that. Maybe I am not that bright—that's a possibility—but, if someone can explain that to me, I would love to know how there is no financial impact resulting from the Free TAFE Bill. Maybe that's one for the minister to come in to this place and talk about. I don't want to criticise people working in the TAFE sector; I think they're doing a really good job, and there are some good outcomes from TAFE. But in my discussions with businesses in my electorate, particularly in hospitality, manufacturing and agriculture, they don't think TAFE's hitting the mark. They don't think that TAFE is delivering exactly what they need. TAFE does some good things, but I think the structure and the investment needs to change. I don't think the investment needs to go into making it free for people; I think the investment needs to go into making it better for people and better for Australian industry. I had the great fortune of winning a Churchill Fellowship at the start of 2020. My plan was to go to Europe and North America to study a problem that I'd identified in my electorate—well, I wasn't a member of parliament then, but it was a problem in the region that I lived in. That was the fact that we were having trouble getting students at school to move into business. I wanted to see what countries like Germany, Sweden, Finland and the United Kingdom were doing about that. I got delayed because of the COVID pandemic, but I did get to go last year during the mid-winter break. I was really impressed with the German system of vocational education. I toured many places: Mercedes-Benz in Stuttgart, Fresenius, the chamber of commerce in Frankfurt, and to a terrific technical school, I suppose you'd call it. What impressed me the most about their system was that students got apprenticeships and, depending on the system, they spent two or three days working in the business—for example, Mercedes-Benz—and, for the remaining two or three days of the week they were getting a technical education at a vocational education school. The other good thing about that was that the vocational education system and the curriculum wasn't so much decided upon and run by the government; it was run by the chamber of commerce. Industry had more involvement in the curriculum than I have noticed that industry has in the TAFE curriculum here. I think that's something we can work on to improve TAFE. The other thing that impressed me about that was the quality of the technical school and the quality of the teaching. Whilst I don't want to denigrate TAFE, I thought that what I saw in Germany was better than what we have here in TAFE. I say that as a solution. Instead of investing in and spending the taxpayers' money on making it free for anyone—as the member for Gippsland pointed out, there's no consideration of capacity to pay. You could have a billionaire walk in and do a fee-free TAFE course. You could have someone who has enormous resources or someone whose parents have enormous resources who might pay. It's not targeted at the most vulnerable people, whom we do want to get an education. So, instead of that investment into just making it open slather or free for anyone who walks through the door, why don't we invest in improving the system and look at what countries overseas do in relation to vocational education? I think that's really important. The member for Gippsland raised some very good points—and I interjected behind him, just to give him some support—about the word 'evaluation'. It's important, and the onus is on governments and ministers in this place, to evaluate the effect of the taxpayer spend. As I pointed out before, many people have made a very critical and poor evaluation of the Victorian government's decision to waste $589 million on a Commonwealth Games that didn't go ahead. There have been many questions from this side of the House to the minister to say, 'Of the 508,000 enrolments, how many people have completed their course, how many people are progressing through their course, and how many people are dropping out?' There seems to be some real confusion as to whether that data is available or not. Senate estimates seem to have uncovered that there is data available, but then the minister comes in and says, 'They're four-year courses, so we don't know yet.' I don't think that's good enough. I think the minister has to be able to say, 'Here is the evaluation of where those enrolments are up to,' because we, the parliament, and the taxpayers who are working very hard to pay this tax are spending a lot of money on this policy, and they want to know what bang they're getting for their buck. I think that's reasonable, and the minister needs to come clean on some of that. We need more robust evaluation of a policy such as this. Vocational academic pathways are really important for people. People need to have access to university or vocational education. It's not for everyone, but it certainly doesn't enhance people's lives. It enhances people's earning capacity and it enhances us as a nation. But what's the best bang for buck for our taxpayer dollars in relation to our education systems? Is it just making it free for everyone, or can we invest that money in a better way, looking, as I've said, to Europe? Is it reasonable to say that an Australian who benefits from the education that they receive from the taxpayer should contribute to that education? Not necessarily upfront, because that would be a barrier to entry, but down the track in the way that FEE-HELP and other student loan systems have been set up in relation to other courses. I pose that question. The coalition won't be supporting this bill, because we don't see it as being a reasonable expenditure of taxpayers' money. There are too many questions about how it would be funded and it fails the general fairness test. It doesn't target money at vulnerable people, it just sort of throws it out there. Again, I'm for investment in Australian education, but let's make it a targeted investment that improves the education system and our students, and benefits our industries as much as it can. 11:59 Ms 263547 Corangamite COKER () (): Free TAFE changes lives. It's a foundation for opportunity for many Australians—for young people, for women, for thousands of people across Australia who want well-paid and secure work in sectors where we have worker shortages. Our government recognises this and understands the crucial role that this sector will play in building Australia's future. That's why I stand today to support the Free TAFE Bill 2024, a bill that will ensure that free TAFE becomes permanent. I stand on behalf of many Australians—thousands of TAFE students, school leavers and everyday people—who want a career change. I stand on behalf of all those people across my electorate of Corangamite who value TAFE: people who want to build the houses we need, people who want to make more things here in Australia, people who want to care for our most vulnerable Australians or provide our youngest Australians with early-years education, people who support this reform, and people who have benefited from the extraordinary success of free TAFE in the last 18 months. We know that more than half a million Australians have embraced this opportunity, gaining the skills that they want in the areas we need, like nursing, manufacturing, the care sector and construction. As the member for Corangamite, I certainly note that this legislation will strengthen Gordon TAFE in my electorate and its capacity to attract more students to our region and, in turn, support economic success for our region. The Gordon is playing an amazing role, offering opportunities for many people across our communities in the Bellarine, the Surf Coast and the Geelong region. It is an amazing organisation. It started in the 19th century and began because there was such a need for skills in our growing economy. Today, we're facing a similar challenge to broaden our skills base and expand our skilled workforce so that it can meet the needs of Australia and take us into the future as a strong economy. To do that, we need to empower TAFE to do its job well. That means pursuing bold reforms like free TAFE, a reform that backs in TAFEs like the Gordon to grow our skills base. I would like to give a shout out to Gordon, which has gone from strength to strength, with now 13,000 students enrolled. It began with only 10 students all those years ago. There are many success stories that have come from Gordon TAFE. I met with a TAFE student yesterday here at parliament, Trey McAuley. He's a local apprentice carpenter and he is inspiring other apprentices and trainees to aim for the stars just like he has. Trey's apprenticeship and training at Gordon has led to an opportunity to represent Australia in the 47th WorldSkills International Championships in Lyon, France this year. Trey said that TAFE provided him with so many amazing opportunities, and he said: …I love my job, and to think it began with a regional competition at The Gordon and led me to where I am now is exciting…My employer is another reason why working in the trade industry has been a great career choice. I'm committed to giving it my best. That's what TAFE is all about, and free TAFE will mean this experience is available to so many more Australians who would otherwise miss out. We do have a responsibility to help people here and now. That starts with education for all Australians, no matter their background or financial situation, so that no one is held back and no one is left behind. We believe in equal opportunity. By making TAFE free, we're removing the financial barriers to access and ensuring that everyone has a chance to pursue a career they love and achieve their potential. Importantly, we believe in investing in our people. By investing in them, we're ensuring all Australians have the skills and capacity to contribute to a thriving economy. It's clear our whole nation benefits when we make it easier for people to access education. A fairer society benefits everyone. The long-term benefits of more skilled, productive workers will create economic growth that benefits all Australians. The reality is that the cost of inaction is higher. Failing to invest in skilling up our people will leave businesses stranded, businesses who are still struggling from workforce shortages, workforce shortages that are a legacy of the former coalition government. We all remember how the Liberals presided over the second-biggest skills shortage in the OECD. Now in opposition they're refusing to back so many key reforms in skills and training: our additional free TAFE and VET places for construction, expanding access to new energy apprenticeships, expanding capacity for training facilities and a trainer workforce, support for women's careers in VET or increased financial supports to prioritise apprenticeships and employers. And still they failed to land a national agreement with states and territories to build Australia's skills base. In government, the Liberals cut $3 billion of funding from the VET system and TAFE. Instead of funding TAFEs and skilling Australians, the Liberal government paid celebrity tradie Scott Cam $345,000 for 15 months of work in 2020. The Leader of the Opposition hasn't said the word 'TAFE' in this place since 2004. But what's absolutely extraordinary is that the Liberal Party opposed free TAFE. They want to slam the door on opportunity for future Australians. They want to deny people the opportunity that half a million people have already embraced. Why would they do this? The Deputy Leader of the Opposition has pulled back the curtain to reveal the flawed reasoning behind why they want to rip apart the TAFE sector. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition made some statements on this bill in the House that in my opinion were quite shocking. She said: And remember this, and it's a key principle and tenet of the Liberal Party: if you don't pay for something, you don't value it. She then went on to dig an even bigger hole and say: So, if you're told that your TAFE is free and all you have to do is turn up—you actually have to do some work, and then you have to get a qualification at the end—and if that's all that it is but you haven't paid for it, you don't see it as something that makes a difference to you in your life; you don't see it as something valuable. These comments do reflect so much about the Liberal Party's values or, in this case, the lack of them—that education and a pathway to rewarding work only exists for those that can afford it. And what would the deputy opposition leader say to the 500,000 recipients of free TAFE—that their skills are less valuable because they have received support? In stark contrast, the Labor government believes that Australians should have access to education and to accreditation, regardless of what's in your or your parents' bank accounts. I would urge those opposite, instead of bagging free TAFE, to get out there and talk to people who've benefited from the program. There are thousands of people right across our country and in my electorate of Corangamite who are so enthusiastic about this opportunity and the benefits it has brought to them and to our nation. In closing, I'd like to draw the attention of the House to the comments made by the shadow spokesperson for education. The senator for Victoria said: … there are people, employers everywhere, crying out for tradies, for workers that don't necessarily require university education. What I'd say to the senator is this: you are correct; we need more tradies, and our tradies don't necessarily need university education. But they do need a TAFE qualification. But not all Australians who want to be a tradie can afford that qualification. And that's why free TAFE is important. That's why Labor is backing this reform. Free TAFE is empowering people to pursue their dreams, to secure rewarding work, to get a decent pay packet and to contribute to Australia's productivity in sectors that need qualified workers. Free TAFE makes absolute sense, and I urge the opposition to join us in supporting this bill and all those who will benefit from it. 12:10 Mr WILLCOX 286535 Dawson I rise today to speak on the Free TAFE Bill 2024. Well, folks, you can see it's election time. The Albanese Labor government try and come up with big announcements but, when it comes down to the finer details, you uncover just how dodgy their ideas really are. You know education is the most powerful weapon we have against disadvantage, and it is the best investment we can make in Australia's future. In government, the coalition invested more than $13 billion in skills over the final two years alone, representing the most significant reforms to Aussie skills in more than a decade. The coalition will oppose Labor's fee-free TAFE, because it is unfunded and could permanently increase Commonwealth spending by up to $500 million a year. So, the question is: what will Labor cut to fund this permanent commitment? Will Prime Minister Albanese make good on his commitment? Or will it be like his power price promise? Remember that, everybody? Prime Minister Albanese promised that, if he was elected, power bills would be $275 cheaper—a promise he repeated 97 times. However, since he's been elected, he cannot even say the number, and power prices have risen substantially. Remember the Prime Minister's great line, 'My word is my bond'? And, less than 48 hours later, he broke his promise and didn't even blink an eye. So for all the people who are looking at this policy and hoping to obtain fee-free TAFE in the future, please be careful—be very, very careful—because this current Prime Minister has all the credibility of a vegetarian shark. The Albanese Labor government has failed to outline how it plans to fund this unfunded election promise. Is this the right way to use our hardworking taxpayers' money? We on this side of the House are not anti-TAFE. But we are concerned about the Commonwealth funding places only at TAFEs, through fee-free TAFE policies. What about the other vocational training providers? What about Vocational Skills Australia, the National College of Vocational Education, the Vocational Language and Learning Centre, Vocational Training Institute, and many other organisations? Why single out TAFE? Prime Minister Albanese and skills minister Andrew Giles have repeatedly dodged questions about how many Australians have completed or dropped out of the $500,000 fee-free TAFE courses. This is despite the government's own talking points stating that just 13 per cent of fee-free TAFE enrolments have resulted in a qualification being completed, at an eye-watering cost of $1.5 billion. Minister Giles may have misled the parliament when he stated that fee-free TAFE completion numbers— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 230531 Member for Dawson, I'd just remind you, while you're giving your address, to refer to members by their ministerial title. Mr WILLCOX 286535 Skills minister Andrew Giles may have misled parliament when he stated that fee-free TAFE completion numbers could not be provided because it takes four years to get useable data. Officials confirmed that he regularly receives a report on fee-free TAFE numbers, the latest one being as current as 30 June 2024. This data is updated every three months, not every four years. Industry sources suggest free TAFE fail rates could be as high as 50 to 60 per cent across many courses, and the training sector has indicated that some courses have failure rates as high as 70 to 90 per cent. There is a pattern of behaviour with the skills minister, Andrew Giles. His performance in the parliament as the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs led to his sacking. As skills minister, he then told the parliament that fee-free TAFE would have no financial impact, even whilst he had the costing sitting on his desk. He told the parliament he would not know how many fee-free students are graduating until 2028, while his own question time brief told him he had the answer. It was just 13 per cent. Minister Giles is not across his brief, and he is signing up the taxpayer to an ongoing financial commitment he has not found funding for. Prime Minister Albanese and skills minister Andrew Giles must now come clean about why they had deliberately withheld the true ongoing cost of their fee-free TAFE bill for all parliament to see, for all of parliament's consideration. When will they fund their pledge to permanently fund their fee-free TAFE? And how are they going to pay for it? Labor's approach to the Free TAFE Bill is disrespectful to the Australian taxpayers and another example of the Labor loose economic approach. There is no such thing as free. Someone always has to pay, and it's the taxpayers. Those on social benefits who are required to go to TAFE to get a Centrelink payment are enrolling in courses and then dropping out. This is a huge waste of vital resources, and this is at the taxpayers' expense. And how is this dealing with workforce shortages? Since Labor took office, Australia has 85,000 fewer apprentices and trainees. This means we have lost more apprentices and trainees than fee-free TAFE has graduated. That doesn't seem to be going in the right direction to me. If you have a look at the number line and you look at the numbers, that certainly is not going in the right direction. TAFE has been vital in our lives for 141 years, helping train the next generation of Queenslanders or older generations looking for a career change. In my electorate of Dawson, our economy supports many jobs and more than 87,000 workers in Mackay alone, and many of these jobs are tradies. They've had to have some vocational training. The plumbers, who fix our toilets and make sure our leaks are right; the electricians, who keep everything going around the house, who keep the lights on; and the beauty attendants, who keep our wives and girlfriends happy, are certainly worth the money. But we really, really need to keep all the vocational service providers going, not just pick one, not just pick TAFE. With major job shortages, we are seeing a large focus on bringing overseas workers in to fill the gaps. What we would like to see is more vocational service providers training our Australian citizens to undertake these jobs, but not just TAFE. Why is the government always focused on just TAFE? Maybe that will come out as this debate goes on. Across the country we're seeing massive shortages in the aged-care and disability sectors and with our frontline paramedics. What is the Albanese Labor government doing to address this crisis? Even with free courses, those who are registered dropout. In Victoria, for example, just one per cent of those who were registered for a free Certificate II in Plumbing successfully completed their training. Again, this is wasting more money and resources that could have been utilised by someone who is serious about finishing a course or a diploma. Mr Giles 243609 It's a cert IV, mate! You obviously know nothing about this! Mr WILLCOX 286535 I take the interjection from the skills minister, but he'd be better off getting across his brief rather than helping me with mine. Mr Giles 243609 I was trying to help you! Mr WILLCOX 286535 You have a very shocking way of helping; I'll give you that! How can you promise fee-free TAFE courses which may not be free? This is misleading, and students deserve better than making faith pledges on skills and training. How can the Albanese Labor government commit to permanently funding a program without even knowing if it's working effectively? This is wasting funding that could be used elsewhere—a very typical problem that occurs when you have a Labor government. This one-term Labor government has no idea when it comes to making smart decisions for everyday people. As Australians continue to be hit hard by Labor's cost-of-living crisis, they deserve answers as to how Labor is using their money. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese is trying to cash in on the TAFE brand to boost his bad polling numbers. But you can't claim you're permanently funding 100,000 fee-free TAFE places and then refuse to allocate any money. This comes in stark contrast to what happened earlier in the week with the Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2024—remember that? Those opposite had no value for tradies there. Under the misinformation bill, if you are an academic you can't be accused of misinformation but if you're a tradie or layperson you can. All of a sudden they come up with this bill—not very consistent but very typical. Education has always been accessible to those who want to complete a certificate or a diploma. We need people who can enrol and finish their course to improve skills shortages across the country. Skills shortages have worsened under this current Labor government, and the Albanese approach is downright negligent. This legislation is bound to fail while it's not funded and there's no evaluation of how effective it is. This is why this side of the House will not support it. If it wasn't for the questioning of department officials at Senate estimates, the Labor government would have hidden the truth from everyday Australians. I know that taxpayers' money is not important to those opposite but it is important to me. How can we support this reckless legislation? It is totally irresponsible. This is not a good policy and not good value for our taxpayers. Labor's free-TAFE pledge is nothing but a big sham. 12:23 Mr O'CONNOR 00AN3 Gorton I'm very happy to rise and speak on this bill, the Free TAFE Bill 2024. I start by commending the Minister for Skills and Training for incorporating for the future an investment in education and training in this country. There's no doubt that when we came to office just over 2½ years ago we were confronted with one of the worst skills shortages in this country's history. For 50 years we have not had such a great paucity of skills in so many sectors of our economy. For that reason the Prime Minister made the right decision to call together constituent parts of the economy, including representatives of employers, businesses, workers, universities, the VET sector—including TAFEs—and civil society, in order to confront the major challenges we have in our economy. One of the major challenges we've had to date and for the period we've been in government has been to deal with these skills shortages across the economy. Arising out of that summit, the first decision was made by the Albanese government and the state and territory governments to commit to 180,000 fee-free TAFE places for the first 12 months, if you like. We reached the target well before time, and we did so in order to ensure that people across this nation, whether they're in cities, regional towns or smaller communities, were able to access training and education in areas of current and future demand. The reason they were picked up so quickly was that people were really in need of those skills—not only the students acquiring the skills but the businesses that are crying out for a skilled workforce, and, at large, our economy. Out of the success of those early days, we continue to invest and continue to partner with eight other governments, six state and two territory governments, working together. I believe that there are very strong signs of success. I want to disabuse this place of the proposition put by those opposite that this has not been a successful initiative from the commencement, because the reality is that the completion rates of fee-free TAFE—and that data will continue to flow through from providers to state and territory governments to the Commonwealth—are in most circumstances higher than the completion rates of university degrees and other VET sector courses. That's the first thing that should be said, because there's a lot of misinformation being put forward by those opposite, who do not have a clue when it comes to dealing with TAFE. We know the only time that they consider TAFE is when it's about how they can rip as much money as they can from those remarkable public providers. That's the history of the coalition when it comes to looking after TAFE colleges throughout this country, unfortunately. I'm most surprised that the member for Dawson, the preceding speaker, who represents a community that absolutely requires access to education and training, including in the VET sector, would think it was a nonsense to provide opportunities for his constituents. You think about this. There are more than half a million Australians enrolled in fee-free TAFE. That means approximately 3,000 to 4,000 people in each and every electorate of this country—because the other thing about the data, when you look at access to free TAFE courses, is that you see there has been a real effort to ensure that this is an investment across Australia. Just over a third of the places, for example, are in regional Australia, as they should be. Over 50 per cent, closer to 60 per cent, are for women, and that's largely because of the demand in sectors of the economy where there are more women working and more opportunities in education and the care economy. The nonsense put forward by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, the shadow minister, and those who read her notes and have been pretty much parroting it since the debate started in this place, is shown to be completely wrong when you look at the facts. This is a successful scheme. It's been taken up by half a million Australians or more, and it's been popular throughout the country, in city and regional areas, and I think it will continue to be successful. The reason I think it will be successful is that we are in dire need of this investment. This is not just to support students and young workers in acquiring skills. This is for businesses that are crying out for the skills that they need. This is for our economy because, as the minister has said, and I said before him, we are suffering the worst skills shortage in half a century and we need to do better. This bill also is in the context of a lot of reforms outlined by the Albanese government in relation to the VET sector. Frankly, I think federal governments, even Labor governments of the past, could have done better in the VET sector, looking back. Hindsight's obviously an easy perspective. But the reality is that this government, the Albanese government, has put the VET sector on an equal footing with the university sector in a way that no preceding federal government has done, or at least not for decades. We've done that by lifting the status of the VET sector, including the very important role that public providers play in this very critical tertiary sector in our country. I'm very proud that we've managed to do that. We've elevated the sector, designating a minister responsible for the sector—working closely, of course, with the minister responsible for universities, but working primarily to ensure the VET sector is successful. And why are we looking to do that? Because the VET sector provides nearly half the skills to our labour market. Historically, the Commonwealth has too often acted as a funding body rather than as a strategic partner with state and territory governments. The National Skills Agreement, a five-year agreement with $30 billion of financial certainty for the sector, was a landmark agreement and one that had not been reached for a decade. In the previous nine years, the previous government failed to reach any agreement with state and territory governments on the VET sector, and that was to the detriment of not only the sector but the people looking to acquire skills and the businesses who wanted to ensure that their skill vacancies could be filled. This is about ensuring, firstly, that we work as strategic partners with state and territory governments and, secondly, that we work closer with industry so that we are in touch with the changing nature of the labour market and our economy and making sure that we are investing in areas of demand—not just for today but for tomorrow. There is a time lag between what is needed now and what is needed after the acquisition of skills and knowledge. We have to anticipate more precisely what our economy needs in three years time and in five years time so that when we look to invest in education and training, whether it be universities or the VET sector, we do so with an understanding of what our economy, labour market and businesses demand. And I think we will do that better with the creation of Jobs and Skills Australia. Jobs and Skills Australia is about anticipating more precisely the needs of our labour market today and tomorrow. It is complemented by jobs and skills councils, through which we are making sure we have real economic insight into the data analysed by Jobs and Skills Australia. That combination of data collection and analysis of the labour market and real economic insight by economic players in different sectors of our economy will bring about much better intelligence for governments—and for industry—to make decisions around investing in education and training for this country. And that's what we're seeing under this government. It was not a coincidence that this government chose to introduce the Jobs and Skills Australia legislation as the first bill of this parliamentary term. I want to pay tribute to the Prime Minister. It was a signature policy of his. He saw it as being akin to Infrastructure Australia—what we did with capital investment we could do with human capital. I think that has been a great success to date. There's a long way to go, but I'm certainly confident that that will continue to work in the interests of the Australian people, our economy and, indeed, workers and businesses. This is all working in combination. Setting up an arrangement where the best intelligence informs our funding in education and training, whether it be universities or the VET sector, is critical so we don't waste taxpayers' money. The other thing I want to knock on the head is the idea that we don't invest in non-TAFE providers. There is an enormous amount of investment in them. Billions and billions of dollars are invested in non-public providers in the VET sector by the Commonwealth and by state and territory governments. We do believe that TAFE should sit at the heart of the VET sector, but we accept that there are industry providers and other specialist providers who really do provide great education and training. Our major concern as a government is that we want to get rid of the shonks. We want to get rid of the bottom feeders. We want to get rid of the ones who'd like to spend more time turning up to campaign fundraisers for politicians than actually delivering skills to their students. That's why we provided powers to the regulatory body, ASQA—and to the minister—to make sure that, if we find that people are being exploited or that students are not getting the standard of education and training that they deserve, we are able to rid our sector of those providers. We will do so in the interests of not only the students but the taxpayers of Australia, who fund some of these providers, and the businesses who need qualified staff, not those with phony qualifications from dodgy providers. I'm very proud of the fact that in my time in the skills portfolio we were very much focused on removing low-quality and subquality providers, which in some cases were criminal in the way in which they defrauded students who were apparently enrolled in training courses that weren't actually operating. We need to clean up the sector. We need to lift it, to elevate it, and to put TAFE back at the centre. That's all happening under this government and I think this bill is a manifestation of that ongoing reform. This bill also provides an opportunity for the people of Australia to understand how little the opposition cares about education training in this country. Every speaker on the other side is getting up and trashing TAFE and attacking students who get support at a time of acute cost-of-living pressures. They don't want us to provide support at a time when people are struggling to make ends meet in some situations. They don't want us to remove cost barriers to education and training, yet during the pandemic they were willing to provide Harvey Norman, who was in receipt of record profits, millions and millions of dollars of taxpayer funding. And they don't want to provide a worker or a student in the electorate of Dawson an opportunity to acquire skills so that person can be gainfully employed. That is the hypocrisy here. It's not that they don't like taxpayers' money being spent; they just don't want taxpayers' money spent on ordinary Australians. They want it to be given to companies who are making record profits during a pandemic. That's how faulty the JobKeeper design was. We supported JobKeeper, but we did not support excessive money going to companies that were making record profits. That was a waste of taxpayers' money. But apparently, according to the opposition, wasteful spending includes funding TAFE courses in order to remove cost barriers for students to acquire skills in areas of demand. I've heard those opposite say that this does not cover all courses; well, it doesn't. The design of this program is focused on those areas which are in acute demand in our economy. We make no apologies about investing in areas which are an existing and future demand of our labour market, our businesses and those workers who need those skills. That is a good design policy. Maybe they should have thought of that sort of design when they were creating JobKeeper and not providing it to companies that were making more money during the pandemic rather than less. We have focused on those areas of demand, so we know that if you acquire those skills your chances of employment are much greater. It means that those businesses crying out for skills are more likely to find a prospective employee as a result of the acquisition of those skills. This is a perfectly designed policy to assist in investing in education training, because we do believe there's a causal link between how knowledgeable and how innovative our labour market is and the wellbeing of Australia. We understand that in a knowledge based, globalised economy the countries with the smartest, most knowledgeable and most skilled labour markets will be the winners in the 21st century. It seems to be lost on those opposite that investing in education training is not just good for the recipients who acquire that knowledge and those skills but also good for their families, for business, for our economy and for our society. For all the reasons that I've outlined, and for the many more that the minister and other members on this side have added to this debate, I would ask those opposite to think again and to support this legislation. It's really important for students and it's really important for workers. It's important for businesses and, as I said, it's important for our national economy. 12:38 Mr PIKE 300120 Bowman It is an interesting topic that we're debating today, the Free TAFE Bill 2024. It's one that I think should be important to all members across the chamber. We heard a bit there from the member for Gorton about what the overarching objective of the policy is. If we forget about the partisanship for a moment I think that we can boil it down to the fact that we need to determine a way, within this building, to ensure that the future needs of Australia's economy are met. I think the question needs to be: how do we do that in the most efficient and effective way that we possibly can? It's not just about giving those individual Australians the opportunity to make more of their opportunity in life—to earn more money and to create more opportunity for themselves and their families. It's also about the broader economic opportunity for Australia. How do we ensure that our young people—and in many cases, not-so-young people—have the skills required to boost our economic chances, to make us competitive internationally and to meet those needs in our communities? I think about the skill shortages that are currently in place within the electorate of Bowman. We've got a massive housing shortage at the moment. I know that's not unique to me but a problem we're facing across the board. A lot of that challenge, of course, are issues around planning and approvals at the local government level, but a large part of it—and I talk to a lot of building companies within my electorate and my background is in the property sector—is those skill shortages. They can't find enough people to build the homes that they need. That's why it's important we try to tackle that. And it's important that we make sure, when we invest taxpayer funds in initiatives that are seeking to address it, that it's done in the most prudent and most effective way. Unfortunately, as the bill currently stands, the coalition will have to vote against it, because what we've uncovered is that this promise—we'll acknowledge that this was a promise of this government—is unfunded. It's going to permanently increase Commonwealth spending by $500 million a year, and it's going to commit the Commonwealth to funding fee-free TAFE—I note that's a set of three words that's a challenge to say quickly—before there's been an opportunity to properly evaluate the effectiveness of the program. We've got some serious concerns about the effectiveness of it, and I'll be outlining a bit of that today. I think we uncovered in Senate estimates recently that there's been no review conducted into Labor's fee-free TAFE expenditure to date, which is quite remarkable given that we've reached a point where there has already been a billion dollars of Commonwealth investment in this program. We think it's not appropriate to legislate a commitment to permanently fund a program without telling Australians how much it will cost, reviewing how it's working and how we can improve it, and determining what the dropout rate is and how we can prevent it from being as high as it is. I think we owe it to Australian students to be upfront about that and to demonstrate that we are investing in them but doing it in a way that's responsible for the long haul. Part of our problem with this legislation is that we want to support every student, not just some. There are some great TAFE institutions across this country. I've got a wonderful TAFE at Alexandra Hills, and in a minute I'll talk about what the former federal government invested in that institution. But we want to ensure that, regardless of whether individuals—a local Redlander or any local who's represented within this parliament—want to undertake their training within a TAFE institution or through an independent provider within their area, they are given an appropriate level of support and that the federal government isn't putting its thumb on the balance, which will create poor outcomes overall. The problem is that this policy essentially directs funds to just one part of the training sector. I recognise that there are other federal investments made in private institutions, but this is a significant investment and to favour just one element of the whole training ecosystem is not helpful. We're not anti-TAFE. We're just concerned that federal funding through this program is going only to the TAFE institutions. Of course, we've heard a bit of debate within this chamber about the dropout rate amongst those undertaking these fee-free TAFE courses. We understand that the dropout rate could as be as low as 13 per cent. Then you look at comments recently from the South Australian skills minister. He gave evidence to the South Australian parliament on 30 October that in South Australia the dropout rate for free-free TAFE is 12.5 per cent. This definitely gives us a clue as to what could be happening across the rest of Australia. I want to turn to a report the Productivity Commission have released, which is the report of their five-year productivity inquiry. They talked about options for providing subsidy allocations in the VET sector. I won't read the whole thing verbatim, but I'll talk about their key headlines. They talked about how free tertiary places carry a fiscal cost and are unlikely to improve outcomes. This is from the Productivity Commission, who we task, in this country, with taking a look at the broader picture of these policies and determining what is the most effective way for a federal government to invest. It said that fee-free TAFE policies are also unlikely to provide community-wide benefits, as suggested by the outcomes of this policy in Victoria. It went on to note: Although enrolments increased at TAFEs, this probably reflected substitution from students who would have otherwise studied at private and community providers. For example, there were fewer enrolments in the Diploma of Nursing at non-TAFE providers, against the trend of previous years. Some private providers claimed that many students were feeling a financial pressure to study at TAFE. It also went on to note: It weakened competition as the market share of TAFEs increased at the expense of private and community providers, diverging from the national trend. So we had seen the national trend going in the different direction, and, due to the market manipulation in Victoria by the state government's policies, we saw that flip, and that's not necessarily a good thing, as we've uncovered with the—there are some dodgy providers out there. I think we all admit that, and I think governments from both sides of the chamber have been working to try to knock them out of the industry. But there are also some bloody good providers. There are some really good providers in this country. There are many in my electorate, and they do a great job in training our young people. The Productivity Commission report went on to say: There is also no evidence that the quality of delivery is higher at public than private providers … And I think this side of the chamber acknowledges that. It went on to conclude: Therefore, free TAFE is not a means to increase quality of outcomes. In that context, the additional cost of funding free TAFE would be better spent elsewhere, potentially on widening access to VET, other forms of skills acquisition or other ways of improving the education system. While I'm referring to the 5-year productivity inquiry report from the Productivity Commission, I want to also note what it had to say with regard to student debt, which is, of course, a matter that has been debated in this chamber at some length. It described it as a 'purely redistributive measure', and said: As in the case of free education, it would be regressive, benefiting those who have attended university and tend to have higher incomes, with the largest payments going to those who have completed courses with higher expected lifetime earnings, such as medicine, law, and engineering … There you go. There should be some reading over Christmas for the government in relation to Productivity Commission reports. Looking at the questioning of departmental officials at the Senate estimates that occurred over recent weeks, there has been no performance review of the fee-free TAFE policy, and one will not be completed until June 2025, after the federal election—I'm sure. This means that Labor is effectively committing to permanently fund a program without knowing whether this is actually having the effect on the ground that we want it to have. The minister did answer a question last week in relation to this, when he said that it takes up to four years to get usable data out of these completion number stats. I find that remarkable. I think that, if we're investing at this level as the federal government, we should be able to insist we get quicker data than that and get a proper sense before we commit fully, to determine whether this is effective, if there are other means by which we could be doing this and how we can ensure that we're not getting a dropout rate that's concerning to us. While fee-free TAFE is only delivering what we understand to be a completion rate of 13 per cent, industry led training providers have completion rates of around 80 to 90 per cent. Industry sources suggest that free TAFE fail rates could be as high as 55 to 60 per cent across many courses, and some in the training sector have indicated some courses could have failure rates as high as 70 to 90 per cent. In Victoria, it's worth noting that just one per cent of those who registered for a free certificate IV in plumbing successfully completed their training. I want to reflect a bit on the coalition's record in terms of backing young Australians, and even older Australians, to develop the skills that they need. We don't want to just back one side of the sector; we want to back the whole sector. The coalition handed the Albanese government a skills and training system not just trending up but powering ahead on the back of record investments guaranteed by a strong economy. The policies of the coalition invested over $13 billion into skills over the final two years of the government alone, representing the most significant reforms in Australian skills in over a decade. Trade apprentices in training hit record highs in the final months of the coalition government, and, as of June 2022, there were 429,000 apprentices and trainees in training and 277,900 commencements. Data release from the National Centre for Vocational Education Research confirms that Australia has lost almost 85,000 apprentices and trainees from the national training pipeline since this government came to office—effectively one in five. The data shows the number of apprentices in training has dropped to around 350,000 in March 2024, and over the same period new training commencements dropped to just 166,200 in March, meaning that over 100,000 fewer apprentices and trainees have started a trade or skill since Labor took office—or a drop of about 40 per cent. The important thing is there is a lead time with these. We want to make a dent in the skills shortage, and, if training numbers are dropping off, that will have a significant impact. I want to touch on some of the coalition investment we have seen in my neck of the woods. The previous government were able to invest $1.2 million for an upgrade of the electrical labs at Alexandra Hills TAFE facility. That was part of our $500 million Revitalising TAFE Campuses Across Australia program. It was a pleasure for me to join the then minister there to see the first trainees in that facility, in the dying days in the last term of parliament. It was the first stage of the new electrical engineering upgrades, including a new electrical wiring bay workshop, as well as classrooms and soldering facilities. This upgrade has supported the doubling of students at that TAFE. That's the sort of meaningful investment that businesses in my electorate need to get those trades to build the homes and make the investments within the property sector that we desperately need in my neck of the woods. We've seen up to 840 students use the facilities there this year. That's a fantastic improvement from the facilities that were there before, which were quite outdated. The rhetoric that we've been hearing from those opposite around the fact that the coalition don't support the TAFE sector, that we somehow want to demonise those who are going to TAFE or training people at TAFE doesn't match the reality on the ground. Most of the investment was really worthwhile, and the key thing here is we want to be looking after all students, not just a chosen few. In my final seconds, I'll just reiterate that we don't want to have to support a system or scheme that is underfunded, that's going to permanently increasing expenditure by $500 million a year and that, currently, has not been reviewed. We don't know how effective it's going to be. Debate adjourned. Surveillance Legislation (Confirmation of Application) Bill 2024 38

Surveillance Legislation (Confirmation of Application) Bill 2024

First Reading 38 Second Reading 38 12:54 Mr DREYFUS HWG Isaacs I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Surveillance Legislation (Confirmation of Application) Bill 2024 will clarify that information collected by the Australian Federal Police during Operation Ironside was lawfully obtained. Operation Ironside was a major organised crime investigation undertaken by the AFP between 2018 and 2021. It involved the AFP developing the capability to collect communications over the AN0M application to allow covert surveillance of alleged organised crime networks. Copies of communications sent using the AN0M application were transmitted to servers in Australia. The AFP obtained evidence from those servers in accordance with warrants independently issued under the Surveillance Devices Act 2004 and Crimes Act 1914. The AFP's collection of evidence from the AN0M application has been challenged by defendants in a prosecution arising from Operation Ironside. The defendants allege that the collection of evidence from the AN0M application involved the interception of communications pursuant to the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979,and therefore required warrants to be obtained under that act—rather than under the Surveillance Devices Act. The Supreme Court of South Australia and the South Australian Court of Appeal found that the information collected using the AN0M application was not obtained through an interception of communications pursuant to the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act. The bill is consistent with the decisions of the Supreme Court of South Australia and the South Australian Court of Appeal, by providing that: information, or a record, obtained under a relevant warrant is taken for all purposes not to have been obtained by intercepting a communication, and information, or a record, obtained in reliance, or purported reliance, on a relevant warrant is taken for all purposes to have been obtained under that warrant. The bill will not alter the existing law, or the operation of the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act, Surveillance Devices Act or the Crimes Act. The bill is targeted in its scope and will only apply to information or records obtained under a specified range of warrants issued in connection with Operation Ironside. Conclusion The bill will provide certainty by clarifying that the activities in question were undertaken in a manner that was consistent with parliament's intent when enacting the relevant provisions of the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act, Surveillance Devices Act and the Crimes Act. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Customs Amendment (ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Area Second Protocol Implementation and Other Measures) Bill 2024 39

Customs Amendment (ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Area Second Protocol Implementation and Other Measures) Bill 2024

Report from Federation Chamber 39 Third Reading 39 12:58 Mr GILES 243609 Scullin by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Navigation Amendment Bill 2024 39

Navigation Amendment Bill 2024

Report from Federation Chamber 39 Third Reading 39 12:59 Mr GILES 243609 Scullin by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Free TAFE Bill 2024 39

Free TAFE Bill 2024

Second Reading 39 13:00 Ms BYRNES 299145 Cunningham Since coming into government, the Albanese Labor government has been working hard to make our education system better and fairer. We have passed legislation to make early childhood education and care more affordable for all families. We have introduced legislation to increase the wages of thousands of early childhood educators and help attract and retain more people to the profession. We have introduced legislation to increase funding for public schools, enabling states and territories to fully fund public education and implement reforms to help students catch up, keep up and complete their schooling. We have also introduced legislation to help university students, by capping HELP debt increases to the lower of CPI or WPI, reducing debt growth for students. We've introduced Commonwealth prac payments to support students in fields like teaching and nursing with mandatory placement costs, and we've provide free uni-ready courses to boost access, especially for underrepresented groups. With all of this investment in early childhood education and care, public schools and universities, we are strengthening our commitment to education by further investing in TAFE. The Free TAFE Bill 2024 is not just about boosting our education system; it is about ensuring that every Australian, regardless of their background, has access to the opportunities that they need to build a better life for themselves and their families. Australia is currently facing one of the most significant skill shortages that we have seen in decades. The need for skilled workers in critical sectors such as construction, health care, early childhood education and heavy industry has never been more urgent. Nine in 10 new jobs over the next 10 years will need post-school qualifications, and half of those jobs will need vocational education and training. Regional Development Australia Illawarra Shoalhaven is in the middle of a two-year research project that aims to identify the current and future skill demands in the Illawarra region. This project is currently collecting region-specific data which will help to develop strategies for local employers and businesses to help attract and retain their skilled workforce. The first survey that the RDA conducted for this project, which included responses from 185 employers, highlighted significant challenges. Fifty-six per cent of the respondents reported experiencing high or extreme levels of skill shortages. Sixty per cent of participants are also anticipating a worsening shortage of skilled workers in the near future. However, despite the very clear demand for these critical skills, too many Australians face barriers when it comes to accessing vocational education and training. By eliminating the financial barriers to TAFE education, this side of the House aims to empower more Australians to take up vocational training, equipping them with the skills that they need to secure good, well-paying jobs. This will help to open doors for young people, for women, for First Nations Australians, for jobseekers and for those living in regional and remote areas, who have traditionally been underrepresented in the workforce. This bill is designed with a very clear objective: to make vocational education more accessible, more affordable and more relevant to the needs of our economy. Fee-free TAFE, which began in January 2023 and ran through to 30 June 2024, has far surpassed expectations, with over 508,000 enrolments in priority courses. This includes 131,000 enrolments in care sector courses, such as disability and aged care; 48,900 in digital technology; 35,000 in construction; and 35,500 in early childhood education and care. These impressive national enrolment figures highlight how important the free TAFE initiative is, and in Cunningham we have seen more than 5,500 enrolments to date. And these aren't just numbers. They represent real people gaining valuable qualifications. Each enrolment tells a story of someone taking a step toward a brighter future for themselves, for their families and also for our community. In Cunningham, some of the most popular course enrolments were: the cert III in information technology, which equips students with essential digital skills; the cert III in individual support, which prepares workers for vital roles in aged and disability care; and the cert III in early childhood education and care, which is helping to address the growing demand for qualified childcare professionals. However, the current fee-free TAFE program is set to end on 31 December 2026. Between now and then, we expect that even more people will take advantage of these fee-free courses, boosting our skilled workforce. The new free TAFE legislation will secure at least 100,000 fee-free places each year across Australia, starting in 2027, ensuring that access to vocational training remains a priority for years to come. Last time those opposite were in government we saw the damage done by their disregard for the vocational educational training system and for skilling Australians. They ripped $3 billion from vocational education and training, decimating TAFE. One of the dangers of electing a Dutton Liberal government is that many communities across Australia would see further cuts to vocational education and TAFE. We cannot afford to let those opposite undermine access to vocational education, shutting down pathways into essential industries that are facing skill shortages. The Albanese Labor government is reversing the damage of a decade of neglect and cuts from those opposite, and we are rebuilding TAFE for communities across Australia. We can't afford not to have people equipped with the skills our nation urgently needs. We can't afford not to have plumbers, electricians, aged-care workers, early childhood education and care workers, nurses, construction workers, and so many more professions that require a TAFE education. Our government knows we must invest in TAFE, because the future of our economy, our communities and our nation depends on it. TAFE graduates are critical to so many essential industries, and their contributions ensure that our hospitals run smoothly, our infrastructure projects are completed on time, and our elderly and our children are cared for with dignity and compassion. The Illawarra is so fortunate to have strong TAFE institutions that are providing top-quality training to many of our local workforce. These institutions have shaped countless dedicated and passionate individuals across a wide range of fields, from beauticians and hairdressers to healthcare professionals, aged-care workers, early childhood educators and hospitality experts. TAFE has been the starting point for so many successful careers in our community. In addition, we have a thriving network of skilled tradespeople across the Illawarra: builders, carpenters, plumbers, electricians, boilermakers and fitters, who are the backbone of our local heavy industry. This excellence continues with cutting-edge facilities like the $2.5 million renewable energy training facility at Wollongong TAFE, ensuring that our tradespeople are not only prepared for today's jobs but also equipped for industries of the future, particularly in renewable energy. And the Illawarra has a proud history of trades, with BlueScope at its heart. From electricians and fitters to boilermakers and mechanical technicians, the range of trades involved is vast, with each playing a crucial role in ensuring that the plant runs smoothly, safely and efficiently. These tradespeople have attended TAFE for the trade or further qualifications needed to complete their jobs. As Australia and the world moves to clean energy, we need these tradespeople to be able to upskill and complete courses in clean energy technologies. More and more tradespeople will need to expand their skills and qualifications to meet the demands of a rapidly evolving clean energy sector. As Australia moves towards renewables, TAFE will play a vital role in equipping our electricians, plumbers, builders and engineers with essential knowledge and skills in solar panel installation, battery storage systems, wind turbine maintenance and energy-efficient building practices. We cannot afford to fall behind here or in any other industry that relies on a TAFE qualification. We need a workforce that is skilled, adaptable and ready to meet the challenges of tomorrow. The demand for skilled workers in sectors like aged care, nursing and the renewable energy industry is set to skyrocket in the coming years. By making TAFE courses free, we are encouraging more Australians to consider these career paths which are not only rewarding but also essential to a thriving economy. Access to education should not be determined by one's financial situation. For too long, the cost of TAFE courses has limited many capable Australians in pursuing their dreams. This bill is a step towards levelling the playing field, giving everyone, regardless of their background or financial situation, a fair chance at securing a stable and fulfilling career. In regions like the Illawarra this bill will make a huge impact, allowing more people to gain qualifications needed for our region. TAFE is an essential pathway for many people seeking to change careers, upskill their current roles or take their first steps into the workforce. By creating more free TAFE places each and every year we are investing in our local communities, supporting local businesses and equipping individuals with the skills they need to thrive. A more skilled workforce leads to increased productivity, better wages and a stronger economy. By addressing these skill shortages through this bill we are not only supporting Australian and Illawarra businesses but also enabling them to innovate, to expand and to excel in the global market. I commend the bill to the House. 13:11 Mr VAN MANEN 188315 Forde It was interesting to listen to the comments from the member for Cunningham and, earlier, the member for Gorton. I can say there is much in those comments I agree with, having seen firsthand the benefits of TAFE education and skills education for my brother, who is a ceramic tiler, and for many others across my electorate of Forde who are tradespeople of great excellence, skill and talent and do a tremendous job in our community each and every day. If we don't have tradespeople, we don't have buildings like this. So a trades and vocational education training regime is critically important to the future of this country. None of us on this side of the House have an issue with that; we recognise the importance of that. We did much in our term of government to encourage and build on that. We can go back to the Howard-Costello government and look at the industry skills training centres that the Howard-Costello government set up. One in particular, which is not quite in my patch but I know a number of students from my electorate of Forde certainly go to, is the Industry Trade College, formerly the Australian Industry Trade College, down at Robina. I know of students that travelled from the west of my electorate, from Park Ridge, to go down there not only to complete their education but also to start on their apprenticeships. I know a number of businesses that have taken the opportunity to engage with the Industry Trade College to train their workforce or find young, keen tradesmen and women who want to pursue a career in vocational education and the trades. The success rate of their graduates getting a job when they leave the college is extraordinary; it's somewhere in the order of 95 per cent. What I find interesting with this bill—and many of the points have been well made by my colleagues in their contributions to this debate—is that the first and most important part of this bill is a complete and utter fiction. Why do I say that? I say that because there is not a single dollar of funding attached to the bill—not a single dollar. And it doesn't start until 2027. This is purely a political bill, a bit like other bills we have discussed in this place recently. It's purely for political purposes in the lead-up to a federal election. It does nothing for those people graduating from the many schools across my electorate over the last couple of weeks who are maybe looking to pursue a career in the trades. It does nothing to assist them. Equally, it favours one side of the equation. Interestingly, I note, the National Centre for Vocational Education Research show in their research that generally the independent providers achieve higher qualification completion rates than the government-run providers. In 2023 the NCVER found that the RTOs outperformed public TAFE in completion and student satisfaction, with RTOs having a 54.2 per cent completion rate compared with a 43 per cent completion rate for TAFE for certificate diploma qualifications. These statistics affirm the superior outcomes offered by private RTOs in delivering quality education to those funded through TAFE. If we want to base it on results, which is what we should be doing, we should be looking at the results of the various sectors of the vocational education training space. Why is this not being made available to those students who want to go and study at an RTO? Now, I agree with the comments from the member for Gorton that we want shonky providers removed from the system—100 per cent. You will get no argument from me whatsoever. But that does not mean you then favour entirely one side of the system at the expense of the other. That just distorts the environment. As we have seen with some of the figures that have already come out, the completion rates for some of these courses are in the order of 13 per cent. I know anecdotally of stories from the people I have spoken to in the training sector that many of the students will enrol in these TAFE courses, get a week or so in and go, 'No, that's not for me,' but the TAFE has already been paid on enrolment rather than on results. If we want to get the maximum value for taxpayer funds, we need to focus on funding the areas that actually do deliver the results. If we look at this bill and its failures—well, the list is fairly long, and I have pointed out most of them already, but they probably bear repeating because those opposite don't seem to be listening particularly hard—the funding for these 100,000 places does not exist. The Prime Minister has misled the Australian people by saying that this is funded. It's not, because there's no money attached, so the question is: where will this funding come from, or what will be cut to fund this permanent commitment of an additional $500 million a year? Maybe he's going to use the new riding instructions for the Future Fund to tap into the Future Fund to fund his commitment. Who knows? Are they going to put it off budget and have it come out of some slush fund that we do not know about at this point in time? This is purely an election fiction. The government's official documents submitted to parliament reveal that the government is yet to commit a single dollar. The explanatory memorandum says: 'There is no financial impact resulting from the Free TAFE Bill 2024.' Of course there's not! They haven't added any money to it! It's just a smoke-and-mirrors trick. And, for a government that in the lead-up to the last election promised openness, accountability, transparency and sound economic management—and all the other promises they made at the last election, which, as we go, day by day, are disappearing into the ether—this is just another one. It's purely for political purposes. It is the only reason I can see for this being done. As I said earlier, we do back vocational education and training. But we don't just back one part of the sector; we back the whole sector. We have reason to back the whole sector, because the statistics from the Centre for Vocational Education Research bear that out. As a coalition government, when we lost government in 2022, we handed the current government a skills and training system that was not just trending upwards but powering ahead on the back of record investments guaranteed by a strong economy. The coalition invested over $13 billion in skills over the final two years of government alone, representing the most significant reforms for Australian skills in over a decade. Trade apprentices in training hit record highs in the final months of the coalition government, and, as of June 2022, there were 429,000 apprentices and tradies in training, with another 277,000—nearly 278,000—commencements. Data released by the National Centre for Vocational Education Research confirms that Australia has lost almost 85,000 apprentices and trainees from the national training pipeline since this Albanese Labor government took office—a loss of one in five. The data shows that apprentices and trainees in training dropped to around 350,000 in March 2024. Over the same period, new training starts or commencements dropped to just 166,200, meaning there are over 100,000—bear that in mind—fewer apprentices and trainees starting a trade or a skill. There's been a drop of almost 40 per cent since the Albanese Labor government took office in May 2022. At a time when we have a skills crisis, we have a government that, under its watch, has seen a 40 per cent decline in apprentices and trainees starting a trade. Almost all the gains the coalition made in building up the skills pipeline have been squandered in just the last 2½ years. As I asked earlier, should that surprise anyone, really? I've often said before in this place: don't look at what Labor say they're going to do; look at what they actually do—because nine times out of 10 they are two completely and utterly different things. We have seen under this Albanese Labor government that Australia is building fewer homes, that the skills shortages have worsened and that we are losing one in five apprentices and trainees across the country. This is all adding to increases in inflation and prices. If you've tried to get a tradie recently, you'll know exactly what I mean. You are paying top dollar. It's great for them—and good on them, because they deserve it—but when you're paying the bill it hurts a bit. In summary, we support every student, not just some. We back every single student, regardless of whether they are training at TAFE or with an independent provider. The problem is the Anthony Albanese Labor government has undertaken a skills policy that directs funds to one part of the training sector rather than to all of it. The government has form in that space of trying to pick winners for its own political benefit. Once again, we've seen, in the lead-up to an election, the government roll out a half-baked policy. Overall, this bill requires greater thought and action to achieve its intended purpose to support all students in the vocational and educational training sector so that we build the skills that we need to continue to grow our economy for the future of this great country. 13:25 Ms RYAN 249224 Lalor I'm pleased to rise today to speak on the Free TAFE Bill 2024. I believe that the 508,000 Australians who have registered across the last two years for fee-free TAFE have got it right. They've signed up to get some skills, to be trained, to take on the jobs that this country needs. Our young people and people looking for work and people looking to retrain—we need them to take up positions where we have shortages, and 500,000 people have done that. This bill is the Labor government's commitment to ensuring that 100,000 fee-free TAFE places will go on, starting in 2027. Those opposite, in an unfathomable move, have chosen to vote against something that is about fixing a skills shortage. Let's just think about where the skills shortage is. We know that it is in early education and child care. We know that it is in aged care. We know that it is in the feminised work industries. So there has to be a missing piece, because they all want to get up and talk about tradies, but none of them actually talk about the care economy and our need for a trained, skilled workforce there. A lot of that is what is driving this, because we know where the shortages are and we know we want to address them. There is a lot of narrative coming from those opposite round completion rates. As I've heard the minister say several times in the last week, the Victorian experience of fee-free TAFE, which is where free TAFE has been going on longest in the country and where we have something that is measurable and reportable, shows a completion rate of 54 per cent. That is higher than the university completion rate and higher than the general VET completion rate, whether that be in TAFE or in a private provider setting. That might be a shock to Australians—that people sign up to study something and do not finish it—but the fact is in fee-free TAFE the completion rate is higher. I will say it again: the fee-free TAFE completion rate is higher than university and higher than general VET training courses. Those opposite are choosing not to hear the minister when he says that. Why would we be surprised? The Deputy Leader of the Opposition, a former minister for skills, this week said: … remember this, and it's a key principle … of the Liberal Party: if you don't pay for something, you don't value it. Well, I have the reverse view: if you don't pay for something, it has nothing to do with its value. And education is always an investment. Those opposite only see education as a cost. On this side of the House we see educating our population as a clear investment in the future. If the skills shortage can teach you anything, it is that governments need to plan for and ensure that they have the structures in place to ensure that Australia has the skilled workforces that we need in the areas that we need them, and that is what this bill is all about. I absolutely wholeheartedly support the Free TAFE Bill and support this government's absolute intent to ensure that we address the skills shortage, particularly in the care economy—and that we pay the workers in the care economy what they're worth. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 The debate is now interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS 43 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Australian Embassy: United States of America 43 13:30 Mr BUCHHOLZ 230531 Wright The Prime Minister must come into the House at question time and answer the question: does he agree with Ambassador Rudd's disrespectful and disgraceful inflammatory comments? The position of the Australian Ambassador to the United States is one of immense responsibility and diplomacy. That role demands discretion, respect and, above all, sound judgement. Unfortunately, Ambassador Rudd has shown anything but. In recent years we have seen Ambassador Rudd call the United States President 'the most destructive president in history', who dragged 'America and democracy through the mud'. That not being enough, he went on to label the US President as the 'village idiot' and a 'traitor to the West'. These inflammatory remarks are more than a personal failing; they reflect a complete lack of judgement by both Ambassador Rudd and the Prime Minister himself, who appointed him. This lack of judgement is not isolated; it has become a hallmark of this Labor government. We've seen it in the diverse and ill-conceived Voice referendum, we've seen it in the mismanagement of the immigration detention issue and we've seen it in their failings on economic issues. This Prime Minister must answer the important question: does he agree with his ambassador's comments? Does he stand by Mr Rudd's claim that the former US President was in fact the 'village idiot'? If so, who's the village idiot now? Australian and American relations are ever better than this government— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 The member for Swan has the call. Swan Electorate: Canning Show, Economy 44 13:31 Ms MASCARENHAS 298800 Swan Yesterday I shared with this place that the greatest show on earth is in the heart of Swan, and that is indeed the Canning Show. CAHRS does a terrific job of running this amazing agricultural show. Dianne Begg, who is the incredible CEO, did her last curtain call, and it will be sad to see an infectious, fun, smart, hardworking woman leave. To David Russell, the new CEO: good luck; you have big heels to fill. Joking! But what I would say is not a joke is same job, same pay. What was interesting was that at the show there was an air hostess boss lady who clocked me and was like, 'Hey, you're Labor. I love the work that you're doing. I'm an air hostess manager, and other people get paid to do the same job as me for $50,000 more. My team members get paid $30,000 more under different contracts.' The Labor government wants to get rid of this two-tiered system. If you're doing the same job, you should get the same pay. Do you know what the Dutton Liberals think? They don't value your work and they don't want you to get the same pay. We cannot afford to have a Dutton Liberal government. We are working hard; you deserve the same pay for the same work. Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2024 44 13:33 Mr BROADBENT MT4 Monash Today I hold petitions signed by 54,464 Australians who are vehemently opposed to the government's mis- and disinformation bill—people who rightly believe this bill is not only a grave threat to freedom of speech but also to our precious democratic values. I'll be delivering these petitions to the petitions committee today. To every Australian who is standing up and speaking out against the government's unprecedented and unparalleled intrusion into our private lives, I say thank you. Hold the line and keep up the pressure. Government overreach is in plain sight, for all to see. This bill should send a chill down the spine of every Australian. In my decades of service to this parliament I've never known such outrageous legislation, which I believe is both unconstitutional and breaches our human rights. It's simple maths. This mis- and disinformation bill plus the social media ban for children under 16 plus digital identity requirements equals tyrannical, state-sanctioned surveillance and censorship. Make no mistake, this is an election issue. Australians know that these bills are an insidious assault on our nation's way of life, sneakily presented under the guise of keeping us safe, but nothing could be further from the truth. They are dangerous, they are a violation of our privacy and they are an ominous sign of what could be in store for the people of this nation. Wanneroo Show 44 13:34 Ms ROBERTS 157125 Pearce The annual Wanneroo Show was held last weekend. This beloved event has been a cornerstone of our community since 1909. It brings pioneers, families and friends together to celebrate the spirit of Wanneroo. WA Premier Roger Cook officially opened the show and it was attended by federal minister Anne Aly and state minister Sabine Winton. Over the course of two vibrant days, attendees enjoyed a delightful array of activities, including stunning displays in the Margaret Cockman Pavilion, showcasing produce from our local market gardeners, arts and crafts, and floral arrangements. There was something for everyone to enjoy. The horse events captivated many, highlighting the rich agricultural heritage of our region. The entertainment was nothing short of spectacular, with live music and thrilling motorbike stunts, and even breathtaking skydivers. The dazzling fireworks lit up our skies each evening, and these moments of joy remind us of the strength and unity within our community. I extend my heartfelt gratitude to the Wanneroo Agricultural Society and all the volunteers, led by their hardworking president, Dot Newton, whose tireless efforts made this event possible. Her dedication ensures that we continue this cherished tradition. I'm very proud to be a patron of the Wanneroo Show and I look forward to its continued success for many years to come. Mental Health 45 13:36 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah Today I rise to speak about mental health, a critical issue affecting so many Australians. November is a month dedicated to raising awareness about mental health and suicide prevention. Tragically, suicide is a leading cause of death among Australians aged 18 to 24, with nine lives lost every day. This crisis demands urgent national action. Locally, Warringah is home to incredible organisations making a difference. Mentoring Men, based in Manly, has provided mentorship to men across Australia since 2018. This vital service addresses a reluctance many men feel towards traditional mental health support. With some 2,455 men lost to suicide in 2022, their work is more important than ever. Lifeline Northern Beaches has been serving our community for over 50 years. It offers crisis support, counselling and education. Its fundraising initiatives, such as op shops, book fairs and the iconic Lifeline Classic surfing competition, which we had last weekend, highlights the community's power to drive change. I'd like to commend the Vipers Run Club, a local running group for men, which is aiming to raise $100,000 for Lifeline's services. They're already over halfway there. On a personal note, next week I will be running 100 kilometres in the Ultra-Trail Kosciuszko to fundraise for Lifeline. I urge everyone to remember that mental health is everyone's responsibility. Middle Arm Sustainable Development Precinct 45 13:37 Mr GOSLING 245392 Solomon The Albanese Labor government is committed to northern Australia, to net zero and to us becoming a renewable energy superpower. The North is playing a critical role in supporting the nation's transition to a net zero economy, developing the critical minerals industry, implementing the government's National Defence Strategy and closing the gap on First Nations disadvantage. The Middle Arm Sustainable Development Precinct will play a key role in the transition to a net zero economy. SunCable and other companies are set to harness the Northern Territory's world-class solar resource, driving green—I prefer to say 'golden'; energy from the sun—electricity into Darwin and the broader region. This energy will drive a new wave of green industrial development at Middle Arm. New green industries include critical minerals processing, hydrogen, ammonia, sustainable aviation fuel and data centres. The Greens pretend that Middle Arm has nothing to do with our renewable energy future, and they do that for their own narrow political reasons. Territorians know better, Australians know better, and our regional neighbours know better. Our children's future lies with the renewable energy revolution, and the Territory is at the forefront of that exciting future. South Australia: Drought 45 13:39 Ms SHARKIE 265980 Mayo Drought conditions in regions across South Australia haven't garnered much attention, despite many parts experiencing deficiencies that mean that rainfall measurements are the lowest on record. We all recognise the impact of low rainfall. What is often not understood is the effect of low soil moisture. City dwellers can simply put on sprinklers, but in the regions low soil moisture is the harbinger of agricultural drought, the failure of crops, the inability to sow and significant financial losses. These losses permeate through the rural economy, affecting everyone, from fodder stores and saleyards to hobby farmers and primary producers. Everyone in a small community is affected. In Mayo, small square bales, round bales, large squares, chaff and silage have all increased exponentially in price, and that's, of course, if you can find it. Essentially we need this. We need this to feed horses and we need this to feed livestock, particularly when the paddocks are lean. We need to have a national conversation about the low rainfall that South Australia's experiencing. We can't make it rain, but we can consider what supports we should put in place—financial, social or otherwise—and we must be thinking about this now. This is not a conversation for after next winter. So I implore this place; let's have a conversation about how drought conditions are affecting South Australia. Education, Cybersafety 46 13:40 Ms LAWRENCE 299150 Hasluck We need to stand for something in this place. I stand for the needs of the children of Hasluck. I stand for a universal early education system that is affordable and accessible for everyone. I stand for the Albanese government's wage justice for early childhood education and care workers, delivering pay rises that are already encouraging people to stay in these vital occupations. In fact, there are now 30,000 more childcare workers than when we came into office. Childcare costs have also been cut for more than one million families. I stand for better and fairer schools so that nobody is held back and nobody is left behind. We have already delivered funding agreements with two states—including, of course, Western Australia—and the territories to ensure that all students at government schools are funded to 100 per cent of the school resourcing standard. This much-needed funding has been welcomed by principals of government schools in Hasluck. It is good for schools, good for teachers, good for the families and good for students, and it's brilliant for Australia. I stand for protecting children in the wisest and best way we can, giving them time to be children before negotiating the hazards that exist alongside the opportunities in social media. What do the members opposite stand for? Where is their full support for early childhood workers? Where is their wholehearted agreement that proper funding for government schools is good policy? Hasluck understand that good policy for children needs a Labor government and that they will be worse off under a Liberal-National one. (Time expired) Inland Rail 46 13:42 Mr COULTON HWN Parkes Last week a press release came out from Minister King and the Prime Minister, acknowledging and taking credit for the completion of the Narrabri to Turrawan upgrade of the railway on the Hunter coal line. Great news—except this government didn't put a razoo into it, and the minister has never been anywhere near Narrabri and wouldn't know where Turrawan was. The significance of this project, which was entirely funded and conceived by the previous government, is that it connects the Hunter coal line to the Inland Rail at Narrabri. So now we will have higher capacity trains—grain trains and cotton trains—going from Moree and Narrabri into the port of Newcastle. The government dropping the ball on the Inland Rail project has been nothing short of a scandal. We talk a lot in this place about reducing our emissions, road safety, promoting regional development and cheaper prices on supermarket shelves. There's one project that does all of that, Inland Rail. It has 1,700 kilometres of track from Melbourne to Brisbane, taking trucks off the road, reducing carbon emissions and leading to cheaper freight, and this government has dropped the ball. We need a new government in Canberra, someone that understands the importance of regional Australia, to get this project back on track. Education 46 13:43 Mr BURNELL 300129 Spence The Albanese Labor government are channelling our inner Freddie Mercury; we want Aussies to break free from barriers to tertiary education. We're doing that by making Elizabeth the home of a brand-new suburban university study hub, making uni more accessible and more affordable by putting higher education on the doorstep of families in the north. This is a Labor government delivering life-changing opportunities where it matters most. We're not stopping there either, because my colleagues and I—all avid Queen fans, I'm sure—want Aussies to break free from disadvantage when it comes to accessing TAFE as well. The opposition leader must be more of a Cher fan, because all he wants to do is turn back time. All he wants to do is find a way to put these barriers straight back up in front of Aussies and make disadvantaged people even more disadvantaged—because this opposition leader has just told half a million people who are transforming their lives through free TAFE that they should give up on their hopes and dreams, that they don't deserve access to education and that their future is a waste of money. This opposition leader is a disgrace. That man is a risk to opportunity in communities like mine. That man is a risk to the future that Aussies want to pursue, and, with my Labor colleagues, I will fight him every step of the way. Cybersafety 46 13:45 Mr COLEMAN 241067 Banks The Leader of the Opposition committed the coalition to a social media age limit of 16 back in June. It should have happened then, but we're pleased it is finally happening now. This issue is urgent. As the Leader of the Opposition has said, we need to pass legislation by next week. The impact of social media on children is one of the defining issues of our era. Parents lie awake at night, worrying about what their kids are being exposed to on Snapchat or TikTok or Instagram. And they are right to worry. We've seen very disturbing mental health trends for Australian children, especially girls, over the past decade. Social media is playing a major role in that devastation. We welcome the fact that Snapchat is now included in the legislation. Snapchat has brought despair, and sometimes tragedy, to many Australian families. We'll work in good faith with the government to finalise this legislation. In particular, we want to ensure that very robust privacy protections are in place. We want to ensure that social media companies must start right now to implement these laws. There is no time to waste. In June, the Leader of the Opposition made a crucial commitment that sparked a national debate. Next week, we can conclude that debate by all standing together in this place to protect Australian children. Universities 47 13:46 Mr REPACHOLI 298840 Hunter I never went to university, because school just wasn't for me. I know that's the case for many others in my electorate too. However, for a lot of people in the Hunter, going to uni is a pathway they're eager to take. Higher education should be something every person in the country can access, but, let's be honest: the Hunter is a vast region. For students here, driving more than an hour the University of Newcastle campus, on top of managing heavy workloads that come with being a uni student, creates real challenges. It's easy to see how this puts our local students at a disadvantage compared to their peers and why it might discourage people from my electorate from pursuing education. That's why the recent announcement of a university study hub at Kurri Kurri community centre is such a game changer. It provides people from across the Hunter with the opportunity to study at university without having to leave their home towns or spend hours commuting each day. This makes university a practical and achievable option for many. I'd also like to give a special shout-out to my friend the member for Paterson. I know how hard you worked on this, and I know how much you care about Kurri Kurri and how you've fought for this project to actually happen there. Thank you for all the work you've put in for this, the member for Paterson, and thank you for how hard you've fought for the people of Kurri Kurri since you were a kid. I'll do my very best for the people of Kurri Kurri and take over from the amazing mark that you've left on their lives. Thank you, member for Paterson. Hughes, Mr Phillip Joel 47 13:48 Mr CONAGHAN 279991 Cowper Today, we honour the life and legacy of Phillip Hughes, a remarkable cricketer from Macksville, in my electorate, whose untimely passing 10 years ago left an indelible mark on our nation. Phillip was not just an extraordinary talent on the cricket field but also a beloved son of Macksville, representing the best of regional Australia with his humility, hard work and determination. In December 2014, our small town stood still as thousands gathered at Macksville High School to bid farewell to Phillip. The cricketing world was present, from Michael Clarke, who movingly described him as his 'little brother', to legends like Ricky Ponting, Shane Warne and Brian Lara. Prime Minister Tony Abbott, then opposition leader Bill Shorten and community members stood side by side, united in grief and adoration for a young man taken way too soon. Phillip's legacy continues to inspire. The naming of the Pacific Highway bridge over the Nambucca River as the Phillip Hughes Bridge is a fitting tribute to his enduring impact. As we cross that bridge, we are forever reminded of this local hero and remarkable young Australian. Today we reflect on not only the loss of Phillip but also the inspiration Phillip brought to the cricket world and the community. Phillip Hughes—forever in our hearts. Cost of Living 47 13:49 Ms FERNANDO 299964 Holt I stand here today as a proud member of the Albanese Labor government fighting for real solutions to the cost-of-living crisis that so many families are facing. On this side of the House, we understand that the cost of living is the No. 1 issue for families across the country. In our short time in government, we have delivered energy bill relief, cheaper child care and real solutions to the housing crisis. We have given Australians a tax cut and student debt relief, and we have expanded bulk billing to make health care affordable for millions. But what have the Liberals done? They have voted against every one of these measures. They voted against energy bill relief, against cheaper child care, against student debt relief, against strengthening Medicare and against affordable housing, and they are against raising the minimum wage. The Liberals claim to care about Australians, yet they consistently block policies designed to give families a fair go. Labor is delivering for Australian families; the Liberals are standing in the way. But, as Kendrick Lamar would say, if Labor got us, then we gon' be alright. Labor Government 47 13:51 Mr CALDWELL 306489 Fadden Last week I had the pleasure of hosting the shadow minister for health, aged care and sport in my electorate of Fadden. Senator Ruston and I visited a local pharmacy to hear firsthand about the problems with the Labor's failed pharmacy-only vaping model, which was rushed, lacked consultation and sets our frontline health services up to be tobacconists. We also hosted a roundtable with local aged-care providers to discuss Labor's Aged Care Bill because we know how important stakeholder feedback is to improving the system. My roundtable attendees included Karen Carey from Arcare Aged Care, Phil Usher and Aaron Lavell from Odyssey Lifestyle Care Communities, Ann Glenister from 501 Care Centre and Sandra Kuppe from Paradise Lakes Care Centre. Lastly, we visited Arcare Parkwood to hear industry feedback on how we might best support our frontline care providers so that they can focus on providing quality care services for our elderly community. The coalition are steadfast in ensuring that we can consult on policies. This is what the government is failing at. Thank you, Senator Ruston, for visiting the Gold Coast and my electorate of Fadden, showing what a future coalition health minister will do: listen and support our community. Bennelong Electorate: Health Care 48 13:52 Mr LAXALE 299174 Bennelong When it comes to Medicare the choice is clear. Labor will always work to strengthen it, while the Liberals will do their best to dismantle it. I'm pleased to report that our efforts to strengthen Medicare are working in Bennelong. Labor federally funded the Top Ryde Medicare urgent care clinic, and since 1 July it has delivered world-class medical care to 2,152 patients. Importantly, every one of those 2,152 visits was fully bulk billed. The Top Ryde Medicare urgent care clinic is open seven days a week, from 8 am to 8 pm, and is a huge part of our plan to strengthen Medicare. We will strengthen Medicare because we believe that Aussies should always be able to access affordable health care when they need it. Four out of five visits in Bennelong are now bulk billed, and, in the last year alone, Bennelong has had an additional 39,515 bulk-billed visits. People have saved over $6.3 million thanks to our cheaper medicines policies, and, from 1 July 2025, Eastwood and Macquarie Park will have public MRI licences, delivering bulk-billed access to MRI machines for the first time in Bennelong. Under the Liberals, bulk-billing rates plummeted, and medicines became more expensive. The Leader of the Opposition said there were too many free Medicare services. Under Labor, that's totally different. Canning Electorate: Health Care 48 13:54 Mr HASTIE 260805 Canning I've risen 13 times in this chamber to speak on the local hospital crisis in the Peel region. Labor have been promising to upgrade our local hospital since 2017, and after eight years in government, including a $152 million pledge to fix it, the question is: what have they delivered? I'll tell you what they've delivered. They have delivered record ambulance ramping. They have delivered emergency department delays. They have delivered case study after case study in public health failures. The Peel Labor MPs—David Templeman, Lisa Munday and Robyn Clarke—are missing in action. They have failed our community. Our hardworking doctors, nurses and medical staff are doing their best, and we thank them for that. Day in, day out they serve our community, but they don't have the resources they need—no extra support, no extra beds and no extra staff. Labor is failing our community. In March 2017, when the state government was elected, ambulance ramping was 6.9 hours for the month. Last month, that figure skyrocketed to over 364 hours. Labor had a job to do and they failed to deliver for the community. Our community's hospital must be fixed; our community deserves better. They also deserve better representation in the state parliament. The Liberals are the only party that are committed to fixing the Peel Health Campus. Energy 48 13:55 Dr CHARLTON I8M Parramatta All week we've listened to the shadow climate minister use a report by Frontier Economics to claim there is a $500 billion discrepancy in the government's costing of climate action. When I heard that, my ears pricked up because I love a good economic report—I do; I love a good economic report. So I read this one, Deputy Speaker, and you're going to be surprised by what I found. This report does not show a $500 billion gap; in fact, the whole report is at pains to show alignment between it and the government's numbers. I'll read you what it says on page 6 of this report: 'In summary, the report modelling matched the government's modelling well and the numbers are 97 per cent the same.' So how on earth do you get from that to a $500 billion discrepancy? Well, 90 per cent of this $500 billion gap is a cheap accounting trick. All he has done is to convert the government's cost of climate action from net present value terms into total dollar terms. It's exactly the same number; it just sounds bigger. It's a cheap trick and he knows it. It is misleading and he knows it. I encourage all of his colleagues who want to retain a shred of credibility to read the report for themselves and dump this $500 billion sham. Economy 49 13:57 Mr FLETCHER L6B Bradfield The Albanese government's time in office has been all about reckless spending, with Canberra's already bloated bureaucracy growing by an additional 36,000 public servants under Labor's watch. Labor has now hired almost 50 new bureaucrats each and every day. Economist Shane Oliver told the Senate Select Committee on the Cost of Living: … the RBA's job would be a lot easier if they didn't have the surge in government spending that has been occurring over the last few years— government spending rates of 27.3 per cent of GDP in the June quarter. Services Australia is a good case study of the reckless spending. There is $1.8 billion now committed for an extra 7,500 public servants, but here are some facts on Services Australia's plummeting performance—something you probably won't hear in the member for Maribyrnong's valedictory speech. When the coalition was in government, it took, on average, 35 days to process a claim for an age pension. From 1 January this year to 1 May this year, the average time was 84 days. The member for Maribyrnong gives the excuse that customer demand for services is increasing. Not true! Demand was 126 million in 2021-22; it has dropped to 92 million in the most recent year. More government spending, poorer outcomes—that is a record of the member for Maribyrnong. Queensland State Election 49 13:58 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton Although it was a tough night for Queensland Labor, I take some positives from the recent state election, starting with the seat of South Brisbane. The Labor candidate, the wonderful Dr Barbara O'Shea, took the seat back from the Greens political party. That party of protests and blocking are now down to one state seat, having failed to pick up additional seats, despite loudly measuring the drapes in half a dozen. Many Greens voters had a case of buyer's remorse. They saw through the cynical antics of the Greens representatives, they're tired of the Greens' stunts, and they're over the Greens preaching one thing and doing the opposite. They preach housing but block housing legislation. The current member for Griffith has blocked legislation in this place that would have had a positive impact on lives in Brisbane. In fact, they're doing it again right now over in the Senate. The Greens said no to essential housing projects in South Brisbane. Instead of enabling a progressive agenda, they're focused on whingeing and fostering division in our community. That's something that Renee Coffey won't do when she becomes the new member for Griffith. Next year, I hope voters make a positive choice for the long-term Labor local, who understands the importance of health, education, housing and delivering cost-of-living relief. I know that voters in Griffith will make a positive choice next year. No more whingeing; it's time for a doer! The current member's running out of people who haven't met him. His days are numbered. The SPEAKER 53517 In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 49 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Future Fund 49 14:00 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson My question is to the Prime Minister. The Future Fund was set up by the Howard government in 2006 to strengthen Australia's long-term financial position. For nearly 20 years, governments of both sides have respected the independence of the fund by not meddling with its investment mandate. Having blown the bank and fuelled inflation with its reckless spending, Labor is now raiding the nation's nest egg to cover its economic failures. Why are Australians paying for the Albanese government's economic incompetence? 14:01 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I was going to give this question to the Treasurer, but the bit in the question about spending is just too much to resist. When we came to office, there was a $78 billion deficit projected and we turned that into a $22 billion surplus, and the following year we turned it into another $15 billion surplus. Those opposite were elected in 2013 with a commitment to do a surplus in the first year and every year thereafter. Dr Chalmers 37998 None for nine, you geniuses! The SPEAKER 53517 The Treasurer will cease interjecting. Mr ALBANESE R36 In spite of the money ripped out of health, education and services—in places like Veterans' Affairs, people couldn't get their payments done—and in spite of the robodebt debacle and everything that we've seen, they ran deficit after deficit after deficit, time after time after time. The SPEAKER 53517 The Leader of the Opposition is entitled to raise a point of order, and he shall do so now. Mr Dutton 00AKI Mr Speaker, I'd firstly like you to deal with the comment from the Treasurer, who surely will have the decency to withdraw it. The SPEAKER 53517 Will the Treasurer withdraw, to assist the House? Dr Chalmers 37998 I withdraw, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER 53517 The Leader of the Opposition. Mr Dutton 00AKI It's pretty beneath the Treasurer, I would have thought—but, anyway, I guess we see your true character. It's on relevance. The Prime Minister was asked about the Future Fund. Is the Prime Minister prepared to defend his decision on the Future Fund? The SPEAKER 53517 The Leader of the House is also entitled to rise on the point of order. I'm not sure why everyone wants to stop everyone raising points of order. We can easily do that by not taking any. I'm sure no-one wants that. The Leader of the House on the point of order. Mr Burke DYW When a question refers to spending and the answer is referring to spending, it's being directly relevant. The SPEAKER 53517 It was also talking about the financial position, the fuelling of inflation and about Australians paying for economic decisions, so, in any universe, that's a very broad topic. The Prime Minister will need to remain relevant to the question that he was asked, which is a very broad question containing many moving parts. Mr ALBANESE R36 I certainly will, Mr Speaker. The Leader of the Opposition, with the broadness of that question, has given me an opportunity not just to confirm the independence of the Future Fund—that's very important—and the fact that their mandate will be about maximising returns, which it will be. I'm also asked about inflation. Inflation was at 6.1 per cent when we came to office, and now it's at 2.8 per cent. We've done that while one million jobs have been created during this term of office. Unemployment is at 4.1 per cent. Real wages are increasing because we want to make sure that people earn more, and there are also tax cuts for all Australians because we want people to keep more of what they earn. Across the board, when you look at all the economic indicators—the Leader of the Opposition stands and asks a broad question about the economy and then we see the nuclear overreaction from him when we actually go through what the economic figures are. We know that there are alternatives because he wants Australians to pay more. He has a housing scheme that will drive up house prices. He has a supermarket scheme that will drive up grocery prices. He has an energy scheme that will drive up power prices. And he has a NBN scheme—I notice they want to privatise the NBN now. They want to privatise the NBN, and we know what the consequences for regional Australia will be. Cybersafety 50 14:06 Ms ROBERTS 157125 Pearce My question is to the Prime Minister. How is the Albanese Labor government helping keep young people safe online? 14:06 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for Pearce for her question. This is an issue that was raised when I was in the member's electorate just a couple of months ago. Today our government has introduced legislation to create a new minimum age of 16 for access to social media. Social media has a social responsibility. As a government, we have a responsibility to keep our young Australians safe. We know that social media is causing social harm. It can be a force for good, to communicate and to engage. But what we have seen so often is young people have, sometimes with catastrophic consequences, been damaged as a result of some of the ways social media can impact them. It's a point that was made to me with absolute clarity by Mat Howard and Kelly O'Brien, the parents of Charlotte; and Robb Evans, the father of Liv Evans. No parent should lose their child, and in these tragic circumstances it has been just extraordinary what they have gone through. But they've channelled that grief and trauma into something positive—into trying to ensure that other parents don't have to go through the same thing. This is a difficult task. This is something that no government around the world has been able to achieve yet. They're all grappling with it, though; this is a global problem. We want young Australians to, essentially, have a childhood. We want parents to have peace of mind. I want young Australians to grow up playing outside with their friends. I want them to communicate people to people, young person to young person, not just through their devices—off their phones and onto footy fields, netball courts and tennis courts and into swimming pools, engaging with each other. We know the really positive impact that banning phones in schools has had. We know it has changed the social interaction that occurs at lunchtime, during play lunch, during that activity, and after school. We know that that has been positive and it has been well received not just by parents and teachers but by young people themselves. The onus in this legislation will be on the social media companies, not parents or young people. There will be no penalties for users. We all know that technology moves fast, and some will try to find ways around these new laws. But that's not a reason to ignore the responsibility we have or to just stand around and wring our hands and say, 'It's too difficult.' The legislation should be passed by this parliament, and I hope that it can be passed this year. We want this action to happen as soon as possible. Economy 51 14:09 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume My question is to the Treasurer. Since this Treasurer has come to office, living standards have collapsed, prices are still rising fast and Labor's reckless spending has kept inflation higher for longer. Having already made Australians poorer, why is this Labor government making future generations pay for its economic incompetence by raiding the Future Fund? The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Moreton is warned. 14:10 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin A bit like with the question that the Prime Minister comprehensively answered a moment ago, it's a bit rich for those opposite to be asking us about inflation when we've more than halved inflation. When we came to office inflation was higher than six per cent; now it's got a two in front of it. So, why they would ask us about inflation, after the shocking record they had on inflation, which they left for us to clean up, is completely beyond me. They've got a lot of nerve to ask about inflation. The same goes— The SPEAKER 53517 The Treasurer is going to pause. We're going to get onto this early. The member for Deakin is not going to give a running commentary during this or any other answer. He's going to cease interjecting for the remainder of this question. Otherwise, he'll leave the chamber, to assist the House. Dr CHALMERS 37998 Thank you, Speaker. They've got a lot of nerve asking about spending, as well. As the Prime Minister comprehensively pointed out a moment ago, we've been cleaning up the mess that they left of the budget that they inherited. They said there would be a surplus in every single one of their nine years; they went none for nine. They didn't deliver a single surplus in their time in office, and we're two for two. So, if he wants to ask me— An honourable member interjecting— Dr CHALMERS 37998 Stop pre-scripting his points of order! Government members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The Treasurer is going to cease talking and pause. Any member can raise a point of order under the standing orders. I don't know why this is so hard for everyone to understand today, but that's the rules, and that's what we're following. So, the member for Hume on a point of order? Mr Taylor 231027 On relevance: the Prime Minister refused to defend the Treasurer's decision. Perhaps the Treasurer— The SPEAKER 53517 Resume your seat. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Macarthur will leave the chamber under 94(a). We just had an explanation about why people are entitled to raise points of order, and the member for Hume is entitled to do that. But you can't add extra things in. You can't jump up and just have a free-for-all. It's not within the standing orders. And if that starts, you can imagine where that could end. So how about we just agree today that you take the point of order, you say 'relevance' and you don't add extra things. That's going to help question time; it's going to help everyone do their job, including mine. The Treasurer was asked a broad question, like the similar one before. And if you have a question in there about why the government is making future generations pay for government's decisions, well, he's going to have to answer that, and he's answering that. That's the crux of the question. So, he's going to be broad with his answer because the question was broad. Dr CHALMERS 37998 The shadow Treasurer would not know the first thing about relevance or about inflation or about government spending. The record that we have had in office has been to turn around two very substantial deficits and to turn them into two very substantial surpluses. Those are facts. Those are in the final budget outcomes for our two full years in office. Those are facts. That's because we're banking upward revisions to revenue, we're finding savings, we're doing all the things that those opposite said they would do but were completely incapable of doing in their nine, almost 10, years in office. So, he's welcome to continue to ask me about inflation or spending. We're making progress on both of those fronts. I'm also very pleased that he's asked me about the Future Fund reforms, because we have made some important announcements today about the future of the Future Fund. What his question goes to is that every time they arc up and play up about our changes to the Future Fund reminds every Australian that they don't want to see more investment in housing, that they don't want to see more investment in cleaner and cheaper energy, that they don't want to see more investment in the kind of infrastructure that makes our economy more resilient and our people more secure. The changes that we are announcing today are not about messing with the independence of the Future Fund. They're not about changing the expected rate of return or the Future Fund board's approach to risk. What they are about is making sure that this tremendous national asset that we have as Australians is working in the service of our national economic interests. That means working in the service of our workers, our communities, our businesses and our investors. That's what these changes are all about. If they don't support more investment in housing, or in cleaner and cheaper energy or infrastructure, that just goes once again to the risk that they pose to our economy and to household budgets. Cybersafety 52 14:15 Mr BURNELL 300129 Spence My question is to the Minister for Communications. How will the Albanese Labor government's legislation for social media age limits support families and promote healthier outcomes for young Australians? 14:15 Ms ROWLAND 159771 Greenway I thank the member for his question. Today, the Albanese government introduced world-leading legislation that sets a minimum age of 16 years for social media. We understand the deep concern of many parents about the harmful impacts of social media, including screen addiction, on their children. Parents have told us that they want help managing their children's use of social media, and the Albanese government is taking action. The Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024 will deliver greater protections for young Australians during critical stages of their development. This bill seeks to set a new normative value in society—that accessing social media is not the defining feature of growing up in Australia. It creates a new definition of 'age-restricted social media platform' to capture those services where a significant purpose of the service is to enable social interaction between two or more users. At a minimum, this will capture TikTok, Facebook, Snapchat, Reddit, Instagram and X, amongst others. The law places the onus on social media platforms, not parents or young people, to take reasonable steps to ensure these protections are in place. The bill and the associated rules I intend to make will ensure continued access to messaging and online gaming and continued access to services which are health and education related, such as headspace, Kids Helpline, Google Classroom and YouTube. The bill also contains robust privacy provisions over and above what is set out in existing privacy laws. Under the proposed legislation, platforms will be required to destroy data collected for age assurance purposes when the age assurance process is complete. Not destroying data would be a breach of the Privacy Act, with penalties also of up to $50 million. The government will also provide funding for the e-safety and information commissioners to support strong oversight. I also want to be open with the parliament that this bill is complex and the approach we are taking is novel. Age assurance technology is not going to be 100 per cent childproof, but we should not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. The legislation brought forward by the Albanese government is in the most fundamental sense about helping families when they're sitting around the kitchen table to have that hard conversation about accessing social media. Our laws will enable parents to say no. This normative value is immense because it will reduce the peer pressure that children feel to be on social media just because their friends are. I thank the many parents, experts and young Australians who have participated in our consultations. The government looks forward to the parliament's examination of the bill, and we will continue to engage constructively to see it progressed. 14:18 Mr COLEMAN 241067 Banks on indulgence—I rise in support of the remarks of the Minister for Communications. This issue of the safety of Australian children online on social media is one of the defining issues of our era. It is of titanic significance to our community. What we have seen in recent years, in the impacts on the mental health of Australian children of social media, has been absolutely appalling. The social media companies for too long have abrogated their responsibility to care about Australian children. When we look at the data on the mental health of Australian children, especially girls, we see devastating impacts. We welcome this legislation being put forward. The Leader of the Opposition committed the coalition to a very similar policy back in June, and we look forward to working constructively on this legislation, with a view to seeing it pass through the parliament next week. DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 53 DISTINGUISHED VISITORS Stephen FitzGerald Scholars Program, TEN4TEN Leadership Dialogue, South Australia: Minister for Human Services, O'Toole, Ms Cathy, Melbourne City Football Club, Fitzroy Community School 53 14:19 The SPEAKER 53517 I'm pleased to inform the House that present in the gallery are participants of the Stephen FitzGerald Scholars Program, hosted by ANU Australian Studies Institute, led by the director, Professor Mark Kenny. I'm pleased to inform the House, also, that present in the gallery today are the year 11 participants of the TEN4TEN Leadership Dialogue Regional Development Australia program, for which the member for Calare is a mentor. I also see Minister Nat Cook from the South Australian government visiting us today, and former member for Herbert Cathy O'Toole. We have young leaders from Melbourne City Football Club as guests of the member for Holt and also students from Fitzroy Community School from the electorate of Wills. Welcome to you all. Honourable members: Hear, hear! QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 53 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Electoral Legislation Amendment (Electoral Reform) Bill 2024 53 14:20 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah To the Treasurer: the government has fast-tracked significant legislation that will pay the Labor Party, on current numbers, $2.7 million per year for administration assistance funding. That includes staff costs, attendance at conferences and seminars, office accommodation and even payment for interest on its loans. Do you accept that the government has failed to acknowledge any economies of scale and that this is poor economic management of public funds and an outrageous slap in the face for Australians doing it tough? 14:21 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin Of course I don't agree with those characterisations. Public funding of elections and of our democracy has been an ongoing feature of our system for some time. What we're trying to do, via the great work of Minister Farrell and others, is to minimise the impact of big money on our politics. That's our motivation here, and that's what the legislation is all about. International Students 53 14:21 Mr RAE 300122 Hawke My question is to the Minister for Education. Why is the Albanese Labor government pursuing important reforms to cap international student numbers and crack down on shonky providers. What is standing in the way and why? 14:22 Mr CLARE HWL Blaxland I thank my friend the sensational member for Hawke for his question. Almost every day in this place, my old mate the member for Herbert asks me to tell a story. Boy oh boy, do we have a story to tell today. Today's Sydney Morning Herald reads: 'Senior Liberal headlines event for student visa agents before tanking migration bill'. The story reads as follows: Coalition frontbencher Sarah Henderson headlined an event for migration agents and private colleges and launched a new brand for a Liberal Party member who helps international students extend stays in Australia just a month before tanking Labor's bill to crack down on the private education sector. It goes on: Henderson, who leads the opposition's education policy— and now, it seems, the migration policy as well— spoke at the private forum attended by dozens of colleges and agents – some of whom have had restrictions imposed on them by the tertiary education regulator or helped international students appeal their visa rejections … It goes on: Some of the companies are also Liberal Party donors. The plot thickens! I said, on Tuesday, it was hard to believe that this opposition leader would get into bed with the Greens on migration. Now, it seems that bed's getting pretty full—full of education agents. But there are some people that are getting out of the bed, because the story goes on: Several shadow ministers and backbenchers said there was frustration in the party room about how the Coalition reached the position, with some left confused about how to articulate it publicly. I'd be confused too. Let's remember what this bill does. This bill responds to the shocking findings from the Nixon review and the Parkinson review about the exploitation of Australia's visa system by dodgy education agents and providers. I remind the House about the bill in the Senate that the Liberal Party and the Greens are in the bed together at the moment trying to stop. It prevents education providers from owning education agent businesses, it requires providers to educate Aussie students first for two years before they're allowed to recruit international students and it prevents providers who are under serious regulatory investigation from recruiting new international students. That's what the Liberal Party is planning to vote against, and, now, perhaps we know why. Economy 54 14:25 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume My question is to the Treasurer. The first chairman of the Future Fund, David Murray, says the Treasurer's raid on the fund 'means it can be used for boondoggle budgeting'. Having already made Australians poorer, why is this Labor government making future generations pay for its economic incompetence by raiding the Future Fund? 14:25 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin Once again there are a couple of elements to that question on the matter of Australian living standards. I remind the House and the people watching at home that when we came to office real wages were falling in five consecutive quarters, and we've got real wages growing again. That's one of the important ways that we're trying to help people make up the ground that they lost during the cost-of-living pressures which began under those opposite. I'm asked about the Future Fund as well and I welcome once again the opportunity to talk about the very important changes that we're announcing today when it comes to the Future Fund. This side of the House wants to see more investment in housing; that side wants to see less investment in housing. This side wants to see more investment in cleaner and cheaper energy; that side wants to see less investment in cleaner and cheaper energy. This side of the House wants to make our infrastructure and our economy more resilient so that our people are more secure; those opposite want to get in the way of that. Now, I'm asked about the comments from David Murray. David Murray, I acknowledged in the press conference I gave earlier, has a right to express a view about these kinds of things, but David Murray is not—on this occasion—correct. He is factually wrong to make the comments that he is making. I refer him and the shadow Treasurer to the investment mandate, which makes it very clear that the fund will be required to consider the 'national priorities in its investment decisions, where possible, appropriate and consistent with strong returns', and that's the main point that we're making today. Nothing that is being announced today is about getting in the way of the Future Fund continuing to realise these strong returns or the same expectations on rate of return—the same treatment of risk. What we are asking the Future Fund to do—and proudly—is, where it makes sense and where it can make the fund money, to consider these big national challenges, which were neglected for too long in the wasted decade of missed opportunities from those opposite. That should not be an especially controversial suggestion for us to make. We are proud of the changes that we're announcing today when it comes to the future of the Future Fund. Every time the shadow Treasurer asks me about this, what he's really telling everybody is that he wants less investment in housing and energy and infrastructure. This is one of the many ways that those opposite pose an unacceptable risk to household budgets and to the economy more broadly. We know that they are a risk because we know their record. We know their record of falling real wages, higher inflation, huge deficits and a trillion dollars in Liberal debt in a budget weighed down with waste and rorts with which the shadow Treasurer has been associated. We make no apologies for the changes we're making. We're proud of them. They're about ensuring that investment flows in ways that benefit the Australian people and strengthen their economy. Cost of Living 54 14:28 Mr KHALIL 101351 Wills My question is also to the Treasurer. What is the Albanese government doing to help Australians with the cost of living, and what obstacles are standing in their way? 14:29 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin Thanks very much to the member for Wills for his very important question. I think it's worth reminding people that, even with all of the progress that this government, under this Prime Minister, is making in the course of this final parliamentary fortnight across a range of really important legislative areas, what we've been able to do is maintain a primary, overwhelming focus on the cost of living and the fight against inflation. We saw out of the United Kingdom overnight just how important it is that we maintain this focus. What we saw from the United Kingdom last night is that inflation—both core and headline inflation—is going up in the United Kingdom. What that means is that inflation is rising in the UK, the US, Canada and Europe at the same time as inflation is coming down here in Australia in welcome and encouraging ways. Inflation has more than halved since we came to office. It's in the Reserve Bank's target range for the first time since 2021. But we know that there is more progress to be made. We know it's not mission accomplished on inflation. We know there's not always a direct correlation between the national economic data, which is going our way, and how people are feeling and faring in communities right around Australia. We acknowledge that and we recognise that. We also know that people have got to make up a lot of lost ground. As I said before, real wages were falling substantially when we came to office. Inflation was much higher. Those opposite were going after Medicare and wages and all of the rest of it, so we've got to help people make up lost ground, and that's what we're doing. That's why the cost of living is our highest priority, and it's why it's so important that in the last four consecutive quarters we've had real wages growth in our economy. It's why it's so important we're rolling out the tax cuts and all of the other responsible cost of living relief that we're providing. We know that those opposite are a risk to all of that, because we know their record. We know that when they were in office they came after people's wages and that we had low wages growth. We had falling real wages. We know they're a risk when it comes to price pressures, because inflation was more than twice what it is now on their watch. We know they're a risk, because they were running huge deficits and they had almost nothing to show for a trillion dollars in Liberal debt. And we know they're a risk because every time we've tried to help someone with the cost of living those opposite have tried to oppose it. They wanted an election over tax cuts for every taxpayer. They didn't want energy bill relief and all the rest of it. That's why Australians would pay a very hefty price for the comical incompetence of the shadow Treasurer and the reckless arrogance of this opposition leader. If those opposite ever got their hands on government again, people would see the same attacks on Medicare, on wages and on cost-of-living help. They'd see the same deficits and the same higher inflation. We know that, because we saw that last time they were in office. Future Fund 55 14:31 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume My question is to the Treasurer. Can the Treasurer confirm whether he discussed the decision to raid the Future Fund with former Treasurer Wayne Swan before the decision was announced? Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Members on my left and my right. There has to be more silence while questions are being asked and before— The SPEAKER 53517 Deputy Leader of the Opposition! Unbelievable! I'm explaining to the House how I want to see more courtesy shown, and then there are interjections like that. You're warned. It's not appropriate. So, for the remainder of question time, everyone, lift the standards. The Treasurer has the call. 14:32 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin I discussed it with the board of the Future Fund and with the chair of the Future Fund. Minister Gallagher and I went to the board of the Future Fund in August of this year. We briefed them on our thinking on the issues we were trying to progress. We had a very productive discussion with them. We followed that up with the chair of the Future Fund subsequently, and we worked together very closely with the Future Fund to make these announcements that we're making today. More broadly, publicly, I've said on a number of occasions, and I've said to the investor round table, which includes the group that I'll be convening here in Canberra tomorrow, that we would be mad not to find ways to make our big national advantages, including our pools of capital in superannuation and the Future Fund, work in our national economic interest. I've made my priorities very clear publicly on a number of occasions. That's what today is partly about, that's what the investor round tables are about, and it's what the work that I've been doing with the Future Fund has been all about. So I want to thank the board members of the Future Fund. I want to thank the chair of the Future Fund for the way that we've been able to work together. I understand the interest in one element of what has been announced today, I genuinely do. But one of the reasons why there are three elements, and not just one, to the changes we're making today is that we worked so closely with the Future Fund. Not drawing down before 2032 is an important part of what's being announced today, as well as all of the governance improvements associated with the statement of expectations. Those are the fruits of working in a consultative, collaborative way with the Future Fund, with the investor round table and with the community more broadly. In the past I've flagged the changes that we made today, and I announced them earlier. Australian Defence Force 56 14:34 Ms SWANSON 264170 Paterson My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister. What measures has the Albanese Labor government taken to build a highly skilled workforce to support Defence and Defence industry, and are there any barriers to this? 14:34 Mr MARLES HWQ Corio I thank the member for her question. As we embark on a significant increase in our defence capability in building infantry fighting vehicles, in constructing ships and frigates and in building submarines, one of the really big challenges is the human challenge. We've got to get the people with the skills to get this done. At the heart of that is vocational and trade training. We have partnered with TAFE SA to increase the number of apprenticeships for fabrication, mechanical and electrical qualifications. We have partnered with South Metro TAFE in Perth for training, which is relevant to the sustainment of submarines, and we are constructing the Skills and Training Academy at the Osborne Naval Shipyard, which is central to providing that on-the-job training which will build the workforce that will build our future frigates and submarines. But what underpins all of that is the Albanese government's commitment to free TAFE—100,000 places every year from 2027 in addition to the 500,000 places which have already been taken up since our government has come to office. You cannot support tradies without supporting their training, and tradies are at the heart of building our nation's defences, which is why the opposition of the Liberal Party to TAFE is so recklessly dangerous. If you take a line through the questions that have been asked in this place by the alternative skills minister, what is completely clear is that she thinks that TAFE just doesn't work. When you look at the Leader of the Opposition, in his entire parliamentary career, he has barely used the word 'TAFE'. When the TAFE sector look to the Liberal Party, all they see is a barren policy permafrost, which, quite frankly, is a risk to our national security. Those opposite still have not committed to Labor's increase in defence funding. The poor shadow minister for defence has been left to haplessly wander around the shadow cabinet desperately looking for an affirmation of any of his ideas with all the confidence of a lost dog while the Leader of the Opposition is now presiding over a Liberal Party which has completely surrendered any of its defence credentials. On this side of the House, the Albanese government is investing in the importance of TAFE as a critical enabler of our nation's security and keeping Australians safe. The SPEAKER 53517 I didn't want to interrupt. I'm just going to ask the Deputy Prime Minister to withdraw that term that referred to the shadow minister please. I wasn't happy with that. Mr Albanese R36 He laughed. The SPEAKER 53517 Order. Mr MARLES HWQ I withdraw. The SPEAKER 53517 Language is important. Budget 56 14:38 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume My question is to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer guarantee that no spending in the federal budget—in housing projects, green projects or infrastructure projects—will be assumed by the Future Fund? 14:38 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin Yes I can, and unfortunately this question is based on a completely unsurprising misunderstanding or misrepresentation from the shadow Treasurer. If the shadow Treasurer knew anything about the Future Fund, if he knew anything about the announcement which has been made today, he would understand a couple of things. First of all, as I reminded him a moment ago, there will be no draw-downs from the Future Fund, at least until 2032. That means that there won't be any taking of money out of the Future Fund and putting it towards the budget. That's the question I'm answering, which he asked a moment ago. That's what I was asked about. The priority areas that we want the Future Fund to invest in are consistent with the government's priorities but in addition to the substantial program of investment that we already have going. We understand what this question is really about. We know what this question is really about. They want less investment in housing. That's why they team up with the Greens in the Senate and voted against investment in housing. They want less investment in cleaner and cheaper energy, and that's why they vote the way they do in the parliament. They don't want to make our economy more resilient. If those opposite knew the first thing about the Future Fund or, indeed, about Australia's major economic pressures and opportunities, they would support, not oppose, our efforts to make sure that capital flows more efficiently in our economy in the service of our national economic objectives to the ultimate benefit of the Australian people, workers, communities, businesses and investors. Every question they ask and every ill-informed, dishonest statement that they make about the changes we are making today reminds people out there in the broader Australian community that they don't want to see investment in housing, cleaner and cheaper energy, or infrastructure, and we do. Housing 57 14:40 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie My question is to the Minister for Housing and Minister for Homelessness. What is the Albanese Labor government doing to help more Australians into homeownership after a decade of neglect? What challenges does the government face? 14:40 Ms O'NEIL 140590 Hotham I want to thank the fantastic member for Macquarie for her question. The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Can the member for New England and the minister for infrastructure not have a conversation? It's completely disrespectful. The minister has the call. Ms O'NEIL 140590 I want to thank the fantastic member for Macquarie for her question. I think most of us in this chamber know that her community's been profoundly and persistently affected by bushfire and flood, so she has this real interest in housing construction. But she also represents a lot of young people in the Blue Mountains and surrounds who have a really simple aspiration, and that is that they want to get the same housing opportunities as their parents and grandparents were given. The Albanese government, because of the advocacy of people like the member for Macquarie, is doing everything that it can to give it to them. Australians are doing it really tough right now, and housing costs are a really big part of that problem. We've got a housing crisis in our country that's been cooking for 30 years and a party opposite me that spent a decade sitting on the Treasury benches and doing absolutely nothing about it. Now, Labor's made a change here. We have an ambitious, $32 billion housing agenda which is helping build more homes, helping renters get a better deal and helping more Australians get that dream they have of homeownership. Part of the mix here is our help-to-buy legislation. This is going to help support 40,000 low- and middle-income earners get into homeownership. We're talking here about childcare workers, about aged-care workers, about nurses. This is a bill for them. These are Australians who need and deserve the help of government. Now, who on earth would stand in the path of 40,000 deserving people getting into homeownership? It is the unholy antihousing alliance that has been built in this parliament by the coalition and by the Australian Greens. Every time in this parliament we have offered the opportunity for the Liberals and the Greens to come together and help us address the housing crisis, they have chosen playing politics over making progress on this issue. The Greens have teamed up with Peter Dutton to oppose homeownership. The SPEAKER 53517 Order. The minister will refer to members by their correct title. Ms O'NEIL 140590 The Greens have teamed up with the Liberals to oppose homeownership. They've teamed up with the Liberals to oppose the building of more social and affordable homes. And it's not just on housing; the Greens have teamed up with the Liberals to oppose environmental protections and economic reform. We're coming around the straight into the election, and I want Australians to remember they are going to have a real choice at this election when it comes to housing—between a party of pessimism, a party of protest and a party of progress: the Liberal Party, which has a horrible track record when it comes to housing and is motivated only by nasty negativity; and the Greens party, which is more interested in waving placards than getting real Australians in the housing they deserve. We're taking a different approach as a government. We've done the hard graft and we're going to build the homes that ordinary people are going to rely on. Health Care 57 14:44 Dr HAINES 282335 Indi My question is for the Minister for Aged Care. In my regional electorate, elderly people face year-long waiting times for home-care packages. Provider shortages and long travel distances mean people are missing out on help showering, eating and taking medication. The situation is dire. I welcome the new Aged Care Act, but its implementation is still more than six months away. What is the government doing now to ensure older Australians can age safely and with dignity in their home? 14:44 Ms WELLS 264121 Lilley I thank the member for Indi for her question. I agree with her that we need to do better by everybody in aged care. That is why we are bringing in once-in-a-generation reform, for which we are currently working through amendments in the other place. We hope very much to be able to deliver that as soon as possible for people like the people waiting for better care in your electorate. What are we doing now? In the budget, we funded more than $500 million worth of home-care packages to the tune of 24,500 new packages. They are rolling out. We expect more 15,500 to be rolled out by the end of this month. Those are rolling out consistently in this last year, before 1 July when the new Support at Home regime is due to begin. As you'd know, because I know you take keen interest in this, when Support at Home is introduced, there are measures in there to address the particular nuanced challenges of regional areas and thin markets in regional areas like yours. There will be $600 million all up to assist Support at Home providers who are in thin markets to address their particular issues when it comes to financial viability. Starting from 1 July 2025, grants will be there to support service delivery in rural and remote locations, like those that you represent, for people with diverse back grounds and people with diverse life experiences. We also included in our budget this year, whilst we were still working to land these once-in-a-generation reforms, $21.6 million for regional, rural and remote focused home-care workforce support. I know you've spoken to me before about the crippling workforce shortages in your area. We recognise that. We put an extra $21.6 million in there to attract 4,000 new workers to the home-care sector. We're going to keep viability supplements available where home-care packages are provided to carer recipients in the modified Monash model 4 to 7 locations. You'll be aware that the now $15 billion pay rise for aged-care workers has been having a really good effect, particularly in remote areas. Every single human resource statistic is up. People are staying. People are coming back to aged care. I know a provider who looks after rural and remote areas said the turnover in his service has dropped 40 per cent since the pay rise because people are coming and staying in home care. These are all the things that we are doing to try and keep the system on track until 1 July. We really hope that come 1 July next year people like the people you represent will really feel the once-in-a-generation reforms that we've worked so hard to deliver. Early Childhood Education 58 14:47 Dr CHARLTON I8M Parramatta My question is to the Minister for Early Childhood Education. How is the Albanese Labor government attracting and retaining more early childhood educators? 14:47 Dr ALY 13050 Cowan I thank the wonderful member not only for his question but also for his continued and unrelenting advocacy for families and children in his electorate. As I've said before, early childhood educators and teachers really do highly skilled and professional work, and they provide an essential service, a service that allows parents to work and to study. That allows primary caregivers, who are mainly women, to return to work or study if they so wish. But for too long the sector has been losing these essential workers, and this government has taken action to change this. We're helping to build and keep the workforce that our children and families need and rely on. A significant part of that commitment to grow this workforce has been our fee-free TAFE. In the first 18 months of fee-free TAFE, there were over 35,000 enrolments in early childhood education and care courses. That's potentially 35,000 more educators and workers in a sector that is desperate for more workers. Earlier this year I visited the TAFE in Leederville with the member for Perth, and we spoke to some early childhood education students who are benefiting from fee-free TAFE. Every single one of them told us that they would not have been able to undertake their course in early childhood education and follow that passion if it had not been for free TAFE. This is what one student said. One student told the member for Perth and I, 'Fee-free TAFE opened doors for me.' And you know what? Under this government the doors will stay open because fee-free TAFE is here to stay. We don't just want to keep attracting more people to the sector; we want to keep those incredible people that are already working there as well. Another one of the students we met was returning to early childhood education after trialling other things. That student told us they were returning because of the supports now available to them. Among those supports is the 15 per cent wage increase that we are delivering. Those students at Leederville TAFE are about ready to graduate; they'll graduate sometime in November. By December, they'll be seeing another $100 in their pay packet, and by next year it will be another $150 in their pay packet. Fee-free TAFE is a vital pipeline, the pipeline that Australia needs to ensure there are essential services provided by a highly skilled and trained workforce that can continue to grow and flourish. Only an Albanese Labor government will deliver it. Economy 59 14:50 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume My question is to the Treasurer. Labor has badly damaged the Queensland and Victorian economies. Now the Albanese Labor government is rating Australia sovereign wealth fund. Will the government guarantee that Future Fund investments will not assume spending commitments currently on the federal budget? 14:51 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin I've already answered that question, but I'll answer it again, and I'll answer it in a different way, given the shadow Treasurer was unable to understand the first way I explained it to him. What we are proposing with the Future Fund is not to replace, and is not instead of, government investment. The government is budgeting for, and is rolling out, substantial investments in housing and energy and infrastructure, and we are not proposing to change the carve-up between what the government does in our budgets and what the Future Fund do in their decisions. I'll explain once again to the shadow Treasurer—I think everybody else understands this by now, but the shadow Treasurer strangely does not—that what is being proposed today does not change the fact that the Future Fund takes its investment decisions independently. We're not changing the expectations about the benchmark rate of return. We're not changing the Future Fund's appetite for risk. We're leaving the independence, the benchmark rate of return and the risk as they were. What we're saying to the Future Fund is, 'As you make these investments, as you focus primarily on returns for the Australian taxpayer, we need you to make sure that you are focused as well on the major economic challenges that we confront as a country.' If those opposite don't think we've got a challenge with housing, they should say so. If they want there to be less investment in housing, just fess up—and same for clean energy and infrastructure and economic resilience. There is no shortage of economic challenges and pressures coming at us from around the world and from around our country. Our job is to modernise our economy, to manage those pressures and to maximise the economic opportunities of a defining decade and to do that in the interests of our workers and our businesses, our communities and our investors. That's what these changes are all about. I've got to say I expected the usual, predictable and partisan hyperventilating from the usual, predictable and partisan places, and that's what we've seen today. This is the first time the shadow Treasurer has got more than a question at three o'clock in a long time, but it's all designed to obscure that they don't want to see investment in housing and energy. We want to see investment in housing and energy. The Future Fund will play its role independently. We'll continue to invest proudly. We've got a lot of ground to make up because when those opposite were in office we had a wasted decade of missed opportunities and warped priorities and a budget full of waste and rorts. We've been cleaning up the mess because we don't want to see Australia go backwards. We don't want to see all of this put at risk because of the record of those opposite. Medicare 59 14:54 Ms BYRNES 299145 Cunningham My question is to the Minister for Health. What action is the Albanese Labor government taking to strengthen Medicare and make medicines cheaper for all Australians after a decade of cuts and neglect? Are there any threats to Medicare? 14:54 Mr BUTLER HWK Hindmarsh I thank the member for Cunningham for the question but also for her support of the Wollongong Medicare Urgent Care Clinic. I am happy to say that today we opened the 78th Medicare urgent care clinic. This one is in Southport—the second clinic on the Gold Coast. The first Gold Coast clinic, in Oxenford, has already seen 10,000 patients, 4,000 of them under the age of 15, and every single one fully bulk billed. They're getting terrific, urgent care, free of charge, but also taking pressure off the busiest emergency department in the country. We're not only opening more urgent care clinics; we're delivering more doctors and we're delivering more bulk billing. In the past two years, we've seen more doctors enter the system than at any time in the past decade. Our record investments in bulk billing have finally stopped the slide in bulk billing that we inherited from those opposite after a decade of cuts and neglect—something the College of GPs called 'freefall'. We've also seen a rebound in every single state and territory and seen an additional 5.4 million free visits to the GP just in the past 12 months. Now, we know there's much more to do, but we are starting to turn Medicare around after a decade of cuts and neglect. But, as the member points out, all of this progress is under threat from a Liberal Party who has never supported Medicare, led by an anti-Medicare trinity who all have form in this area. Of course, the gold medal for undermining Medicare always goes to the Leader of the Opposition, voted by doctors as the worst health minister in the history of Medicare after he tried to abolish bulk billing altogether and tried to take $50 billion out of public hospitals, and so much else besides. But coming up second is the deputy Liberal leader, who takes a more Socratic approach to these things, taking the time this week to explain the deep philosophical underpinnings— The SPEAKER 53517 The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is on a warning. Mr BUTLER HWK of their attacks on bulk billing, because, apparently, according to this philosopher, 'You simply don't value something if you don't pay for it'—very, very deep, as always. And then, always bringing up the rear, is old mate, the shadow Treasurer. On radio earlier this week, he was promising to cut billions of dollars from our investments to strengthen Medicare and promising to close the urgent care clinics, and then he came in yesterday afternoon and pretended he didn't even say it. The faces might change, but the story is always the same: you can't trust the Liberal Party with Medicare. War Graves 60 14:57 Mr WILKIE C2T Clark My question is to the Treasurer. Treasurer, the refusal to grant deductible gift recipient status to the Headstone Project in South Australia—recognising unmarked graves of World War I soldiers—casts doubt over the existing DGR status in other states. This would be a betrayal of the soldiers and a blow to those who have worked so hard to grow the project. Is it your intention to withdraw DGR status for the project or will you commit to granting it nationwide? 14:58 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin I thank the honourable member for his question. We've found a better way to support the really important work of this valued organisation. In response to the member for Mayo not that long ago, who asked a similar question, the assistant minister to the Treasury and I looked into the matters raised by you and by your colleague next to you. We say the same thing now that we said then. We do our best to make decisions about DGR status, conscious of the budget pressures and all of the other priorities. But, in looking into this for the member for Mayo, as we said that we would, we've discovered that there is another important way that we're helping the organisation do its work. I want to say that the government is really grateful for the service of our veterans, and we know the important role that government funding plays in creating, preserving and maintaining memorials to their sacrifice. When Assistant Minister Leigh and I looked into this, we discovered that there are multiple ways that we help our veterans honour the graves of our fallen. I acknowledge the veterans affairs minister as well, because the Office of Australian War Graves takes care of war cemeteries and war graves. They work in Australia, as you know, and Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands, and they also build and look after official Australian memorials overseas. In Minister Keogh's portfolio he's got a program called the Marking Private Graves Grants Program. It's a really important program. I acknowledge his work and his commitment to that program. This grants program means that throughout Australia they can commit to individuals and groups working to identify the unmarked graves of First World War— Mr Joyce e5d Mr Speaker— The SPEAKER 53517 The Treasurer is answering a question directly, and I'll just ask him to pause. When he's giving this sort of detail, I don't know how you can take a point of order, but— Mr Joyce e5d Mr Speaker, it's on relevance. We have a minute to go. The question was: is there going to be DGR— The 53517 Resume your seat. The member has been here long enough to know that that is not how points of order work. And the member for Clark was entitled to ask his question. If he was so aggrieved, I'm sure he would have taken a point of order. But I can't make any minister—as the member knows, from being here so long—give a yes-or-no answer. Dr CHALMERS 37998 Thank you, Mr Speaker. I don't think the member for New England should try to piggyback on the dedicated work of the member for Clark and the member for Mayo next to him, asking an important question, which I'm answering in a respectful way. And I'd point out that in addition to the consideration we give to the DGR status, Minister Keogh in his portfolio, working closely with all of us, has other ways that we support this really important work. And I wanted to confirm for the House, having looked into it, that one of the community groups, ex-service organisations and people who can apply for this funding assistance to mark unmarked private graves of First World War veterans is the Headstone Project. I can confirm for the member for Clark, for the member for Mayo next to him and for the parliament that the Headstone Project has been a successful recipient of grants under this program. And I raise it in that fashion because I understand that there is concern around the DGR status and the different state branches of this important organisation, and I think it's really important that we support their work, and I think this is the most appropriate way for us to do it. Economy 61 15:02 Ms STANLEY 265990 Werriwa My question is to the Prime Minister. How is the Albanese Labor government working to tackle the challenge of global inflation and create jobs, opportunity and economic growth for Australia? What opposition has there been to these measures? 15:02 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for Werriwa for her question. Indeed, my government has been very focused, given global inflation, on impacting cost-of-living pressures that we know people have been under. I'm asked what measures we've taken and also what opposition there's been—and there's something in common between those lists, because every single one of the measures we've put in place has been opposed by those opposite, whether it's tax cuts for taxpayers, tripling of the Medicare bulk-billing incentive, student debt relief, cheaper medicines, cheaper child care, energy bill relief, free TAFE, more money for public and affordable housing, the Help to Buy Scheme to get more people into homeownership, a pay rise for childcare workers, a pay rise for aged-care workers, or the three consecutive submissions we have made that have resulted in the minimum wage being increased three times since we've been in government. As a direct result of those measures, whilst putting that downward pressure on inflation—which is why it's been designed that way—we've seen inflation drop from a six per cent figure, and rising, to 2.8 per cent and falling, under our watch. At the same time that we're seeing that occurring, we're seeing real wages increase so that people are earning more and getting to keep more of what they earn. And we know that those opposite voted 48 times against our IR reforms which have got wages moving again. But this week we saw the quiet bit said out loud by the deputy leader regarding the philosophical underpinnings of this. The deputy leader said, 'It's a key principle and tenet of the Liberal Party. If you don't pay for something, you don't value it'. That's what goes to explain the opposition to free TAFE. The bizarre position that they have from those opposite that somehow free TAFE—giving people skills and opportunity in life—is negative is just extraordinary. Then of course there's Medicare. We know that they don't like people seeing a doctor for free. We know that is against their philosophy, and it certainly was against the practice when this guy was the health minister. It might also explain their opposition to renewables, because the sun is free. They'd much rather have a nuclear reactor sometime in the 2040s—the most expensive form possible. They want people to pay more for medicine, more to see a doctor, more for the emergency room, more for uni and more for childcare. There is a consistency to their approach, and we know why that's the case. Mr Albanese R36 Mr Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper. STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE 61 STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE Jones, Miss Bianca 61 15:05 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler We have received the very sad confirmation from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade that, tragically, Bianca Jones has lost her life. Our first thoughts in this moment are with her family and friends, who are grieving a terrible and cruel loss. This is every parent's very worse fear and a nightmare that no-one should have to endure. All Australians offer them our deepest sympathy in this time of heartbreak. Bianca's trip should have been a joyous time and a source of fond memories in years to come—memories that she should have carried with her into the long, bright future that lay ahead of her. It is beyond sad that this was not to be. We also take this moment to say we're thinking of Bianca's friend Holly Bowles, who is fighting for her life there in Laos. Australians hold her and her family in our hearts as we pray for her and we hope for a good recovery. I also want to take the opportunity to thank those people in the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. When Australians are in trouble, they always pitch in and do a remarkable job, providing representation for Australians wherever that may be around the world. I know that the member for Goldstein wishes to make a comment as well. 15:07 Ms DANIEL 008CH Goldstein Bianca and Holly went on a holiday to Southeast Asia—a rite of passage that many young Australians experience. If you were to look at their holiday photos, you would see the wonderful adventure that these best friends were having together. They could be any of our teenaged kids embarking on life from the wonderful suburbs of Bayside, Melbourne, where they've both grown up—gone to school at Mentone Girls' Grammar and Beaumaris Secondary College, worked in casual jobs and then, of course, played AFLW together at the famous Beauie Sharks. Bianca's parents, Michelle and Mark, and her brother Lachlan have been by her side during this ordeal, for the last few days. Today, of course, they're suffering pain beyond measure, a pain that no parent or sibling should ever experience. I offer my sympathy to Bianca's family and also my strength to Holly's parents, Shaun and Samantha, who remain at her bedside in Bangkok. I'm sure, as I do, the House sends love and strength—along with people all around the country—to the families of these two young Aussie girls who just headed off on an adventure together. I know that so many members of our community are connected to these girls and to these families. I feel your grief. Our hearts are broken. 15:09 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson I join in supporting the fine words of the Prime Minister and the member for Goldstein. On behalf of the coalition, we extend our heartfelt condolences to the family and the friends of this beautiful young girl. This story has been shocking, from the moment it was reported—up to 10 young people have been the subject of this terrible incident, some of who have lost their lives and, as we point out, one young Australian who is still on life support. It is unimaginable, and I share in the comments from the member for Goldstein that any of us who have had a son or daughter travel overseas know this could easily happen to anyone. It is unimaginable. You go through what you could have done differently. There's nothing. It's one of those circumstances that you could never provide for, that could never have been prevented. I thank, as the Prime Minister did, the DFAT staff, the Laos authorities and those people who have provided medical attention and support to the family. Our heartfelt support goes out to Mark, Michelle and Lachlan Jones. Our thoughts and prayers are with those who are still on life support. We hope that there can be some comfort to the family in knowing that every Australian's heart is breaking at the moment for this tragic loss. DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 62 DISTINGUISHED VISITORS McGowan, Hon. Mark, AC, Iemma, Hon. Morris, Maddigan, Hon. Judith Marilyn, Kelty, Mr William John, AC 62 15:10 The SPEAKER 53517 Before we move to the valedictory, I'd like to also recognise in the gallery today the former premiers the Hon. Mark McGowan AC and the Hon. Morris Iemma; the Hon. Judy Maddigan, a former Victorian Speaker; and Bill Kelty AC. PARLIAMENTARY REPRESENTATION 62 PARLIAMENTARY REPRESENTATION Valedictory 62 15:11 Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Maribyrnong In the 123 years of the storied history of the parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia there are 1,244 individuals who've been elected to the House of Representatives. Each of those introduced themselves in their first speech, but only 216 ever got the chance to say goodbye, to give a valedictory. Political life is indeed tough. Election defeat, scandal, illness—section 44! I stand here neither defeated nor disposed, lucky to have served, fortunate to be able to say goodbye and thank you. My first thank you is to my greatest good fortune—my family. To Chloe: you cast everything around you in a golden light. I love you with all my heart—your gift with people, the way you leave every room with five new friends, no baby left uncuddled and a promise to follow up on at least three new policy initiatives. It's not a learned skill; it's an innate quality. It's exactly who you are. And you've passed that on to our three beautiful children. Rupert, Gigi and Clementine: you've been conscripts for the rallies, the speeches, the branch meetings, the polling places—me after polling numbers!—and every community event imaginable, always quick to lift me up when I'm down and even quicker to bring me back to earth when I've needed it. You've given me so much more than I can ever give you, and I don't tell you this enough but I'm so incredibly proud of each of you. To the McGrath and Bryce clans: I'm sorry that you've had such a shy and retiring relative. And I cannot leave off my family thankyou list my faithful British bulldog, Walter. Thank you, buddy, for your unconditional loyalty and being the best listener I've ever met. Mr Speaker, the first role of a member of the House of Representatives is as a local member. I am exceptionally grateful to the voters of Maribyrnong for electing me on six consecutive occasions to this place. When Barry Humphries dreamed up Dame Edna, he based her character on Moonee Ponds, the epitome and epicentre of post-war suburban Australia and the epicentre of my electorate. Today, walking down Puckle Street is to glimpse cultures and traditions from every part of the world. And, for all the diversity, the people are united by a common pride in our community. Gee it's been an honour to represent some superb family businesses: Lee and Tony at Fresh on Young, Ali at Dan Dan's, Cameron at Ascot Saddlery, Olga at Paulene Maree, and so many, many more. You've been the studio for countless live crosses, street walks and Today shows. A big shout-out to my neighbours—Josefina, Rob and his late wife, Katie—and to the Travancore brigade. You've had to put up with the giant buses, the stalkers, the staffers, the journalists and other undesirables. I thank the great people of Maribyrnong for putting their trust in me. You don't have to sit in the parliament to serve the parliament or our nation. I thank all the outstanding Commonwealth public servants I've worked with over many years in Treasury, the ATO, Education, Workplace Relations, the ADF, Hearing Australia, Services Australia, the NDIA, DSS and many more. I thank all the people who make this building tick—the clerks; the security guards; Dom and his team at Aussies; the cleaners, who are graciously here today. You are all indispensable. To my Comcar drivers, Steve, Smokey and Peter, and your wives: thank you for making the trip up from Melbourne. You flatter me very much. Then there are the people that Ryan Liddell used to call my 'paid friends'—that hurt! Behind every politician, all of us, there are dedicated personal staff. Through my 17 years in parliament, 196 have worked for me. The magnificent Sandra Papasidero, who's held my diary, my travel and my life together for 11 years, knows this because she has spoken with nearly all of them in the lead-up to today. There is the remarkable Rod Gurry, who's been my eyes and ears in Maribyrnong right the way through; he's seen them all come and all go. It's a bedrock convention in this place that we don't name all the staff; they don't seek the spotlight, and we don't put it on them. I wanted to up-end that, and name them all. Sadly, the central agencies, as they do, briefed against me in ERC! So I've compromised, and I'll table a list, a roll call, of 196 really great Australians. Honourable members: Hear, hear! Mr SHORTEN 00ATG I say to my staff and former staff: thank you for your patience and your sacrifice for going one day longer. Thank you for always being prepared to craft bold policy—and to tell me when to stop crafting bold policy! Thank you for taking, or faking, an interest in the Roman Empire and Napoleon—toy soldiers are not toys; they're miniature history—and dioramas. And thank you for dealing with the other servants of our democracy—yes, the press gallery. I should note that ever since I announced with the Prime Minister that I was leaving politics, I've never had better coverage and my opponents have never been nicer! I've worked with some outstanding people through the years—Amit, Sam, James, Fiona, Antonia, Maree, Shawn and many more. I'm pleased, in fact, that three of my former staff now sit here in the chamber as members of parliament. Indeed, many of my staff have gone on to great things. I'm sort of okay if some of you don't mention me on your CV—but only sort of! All of you will always be able to find your name in Hansard on this day, with my gratitude. On an occasion like this, a measure of nostalgia is impossible to resist. But I don't want to merely reflect on my past; I want to talk about our nation's future—about the better, smarter and more prosperous destination we can reach, and about the people and the institutions which will take Australia there. It is said that humanity's capacity for justice makes democracy possible but its inclination to injustice makes democracy necessary. Right now, around the globe, democracy is under greater challenge than at any time since the Second World War. We cannot dismiss these things just because we are the fortunate possessors of an island continent far away, hoping our distance makes us immune from troubles elsewhere. We have to jealously guard and nourish our democracy and safeguard our pluralist society. I'm proud to have served in three institutions essential to this endeavour: the Australian Workers Union, the Australian Labor Party and the Commonwealth parliament. I got my MBA from the Melbourne Business School, but it was the members of the first great democratic institution I served, the Australian Workers Union, who taught me about the economy through the privilege of representing them: steelworkers, shipbuilders, fruit pickers on the Murray, tow operators on our ski fields, greenkeepers, winery workers, chicken growers, embalmers and coffin makers, stablehand shearers, aluminium operators, civil construction, and netballers and jockeys too—champion athletes who had won everything finally winning the right to decent pay and conditions. These members were my school, and they taught me about people too. Across the diversity of Australia's locations, occupations and circumstances, when you scratch the surface we Australians share the same aspirations and nurture the same hopes. We Australians by and large are a pragmatic bunch. We don't tend to think in terms of 'isms' or 'ologies'. We don't have time in our day for every new outrage and shock. Most Australians focus on the fundamentals: family, health, home and community. The AWU took me from oil rigs in Bass Strait to farms and factories all over Australia, and it took me to Beaconsfield—the fortnight that began with a fatal, catastrophic rockfall and ended in a man-made miracle. I'll never forget that when Larry Knight's body was found on the Friday, after the rockfall of the Tuesday night, management talked about stopping the rescue so the coroner could take control of the site. I was witness outside the superintendent's office when a salt-of-the-earth AWU miner, Garth Bonney from Rocky Cape, looked at everyone—the police and the coroner—and he said: 'This is not a recovery operation, it's a rescue mission. Until we know different, there are men down there who are still alive.' So a group of modest heroes dug through hard rock and saved their mates, and when Brant and Todd emerged from that mine shaft and tagged out I certainly made sure they got paid for every day that they were trapped down there. I'll also never forget the faces and the names of members who were let down by the system. I remember the explosion at the Esso gas plant in Longford. Two men were killed; two others were badly burned, including Heath, whose wife gave birth while he was on that fateful shift, and the baby didn't see him without bandages for months, and months and months. There was Graham, a mechanic I had signed up one week, who was crushed to death under a bobcat the next. There was Allan, a fitter, whose arm was severed and amputated in a conveyor belt that was neither properly guarded nor immobilised. There was Mario whose lungs were scarred in a single breath after an explosion from a non-ferrous furnace. And Owen—I can still see him at the Caulfield rehab, sitting on his bed, one leg amputated at the hip and the other at the knee, because of a trench collapse. These are all reminders of the most fundamental workplace right of all: the right to come home safely. I was elected to the leadership of the AWU at a very tough time in its history—falling membership and neglected awards were the fruit of a poisoned amalgamation. At the 1997 ACTU congress, in Brisbane, there was only one thing on the mind of delegates: whether to dismember the mighty AWU and divvy up its membership to rival unions or not. But the state AWU leaders—some of whom are here today—our members and I reinvigorated the show. We held true to its best traditions as a modern, moderate, honest democratic union. In this colossal task, and often since, I've benefited from the wisdom of Bill Kelty, who's here today: the understanding that the right of workers to organise for fair wages and decent conditions must move in concert with the imperative for employers to create the wealth that pays the fair wages of the workers' jobs. Modern, honest democratic trade unions should always seek to work with good employers. There should be no dividing line any longer in this parliament between those who are pro- or anti-employer and those who are pro- or anti-union. This country no longer has the time to waste on that false choice. We can work together, and our nation needs this. It is what I've always sought to do. There is a degree of irony. With all the effort I put into ensuring that both workers and companies could benefit from negotiating better agreements, my reward was to be asked a thousand questions for two whole days at the now discredited trade union royal commission—more questions than any CFMEU official; although, to be fair none of them were Leader of the Labor Party! Genuinely, it's a bit easier for me to see the funny side now, and I'm sure the incomparable Sharon McCrohan would agree, as would Leon Zwier, known to many as 'Mr Fixit' and to me as just a great friend. The second important democratic institution I have served is the Australian Labor Party. In fact, serving as the Labor leader for nearly six years was the great privilege of my public life. Our party is indeed a grand and enduring national institution, but its life and strength have always been its people upon whose shoulders I have stood—from the rank-and-file members of the Maribyrnong Labor Party to true believers like George Wright, Neil Pope, Judy Maddigan and the late senator Kimberley Kitching, to name a few. Then there are my perennial comrades in arms, Earl and Luke, Andrew and JP, Michael and Silky, Mocca and Craig: thank you! But all of us in the parliamentary party are merely the tip of the spear. We march at the head of a movement. We carry the hopes and aspirations of millions of working people who want better for their families and our country, and we champion the cause of the most vulnerable. These are the values and policies that the Albanese government will take to the next election—and this is the work I am confident that my colleagues will continue in government after the next election. Serving the Labor Party gave me a rare honour to work with one's heroes. I got to work with Gareth Evans and Robert Ray, with Simon Crean and Barry Jones—and, of course, Paul Keating, who when I became leader I invited back to the caucus room for the first time since 1996. It remains a source of enduring pride that the last act of collaboration between Paul Keating and Bob Hawke was their joint opinion piece advocating for the platform that we took to the 2019 election. It's just a shame more people didn't read it! Through my time as Labor leader I was proud to lead not just a strong opposition but a genuine, positive alternative. I think it's a fitting time to thank my deputy, Tanya Plibersek, in particular for the unwavering support she offered me in those moments. When those of us who were here after 2013 look back after that defeat, we'd been reduced to 54 seats, and I recall—to borrow a phrase from Tony Abbott—the battlelines we drew. They united us, defined us, rebuilt us. Labor is always at its best when we know who and what we are fighting for. We stood against the cuts and austerity of 2014. We stood for Medicare, education and pensioners. We stood against the abolition of ARENA and we stood for real ambition and action on climate. We stood against the entrenchment of inequality and trickle-down economics and we stood for genuine tax reform. We stood against everyday Australians being ripped off. We stood for a banking royal commission. We stood against a harmful, unnecessary, lazy taxpayer funded opinion poll inviting strangers to vote on other people's relationships. We stood for marriage equality. I know we didn't win every battle. I know perhaps some of my ideas were ahead of their time—if there ever is a time for them! But some, such as new incentives for electric vehicles, more Australian manufacturing, new investments in TAFE, and childcare worker wages, are becoming a reality under this government. And there are others I hope can be picked up in the future, in particular the 2019 policy to ensure that all forms of cancer treatment are fully covered by Medicare. When you're in the fight of your life, Medicare should be there with you. Cancer may make you sick, but it shouldn't make you poor. The third great democratic institution I've served is the parliament. From time to time politicians declare that a particular issue is 'above politics'. Now, that sentiment does come from a good place. The parliament has the responsibility to make democracy work. The idea is that we shouldn't let big, important questions be caught in the quicksand of name-calling, gotchas and sloganeering that we are all prone to. But we all know this is not the totality of politics, any more than do the first salvos of question time reflect the business of a sitting day. And—no shade on you, Mr Speaker—I'm not proud to say that sometimes during question time we are pretty ungovernable, although you should count yourself lucky you're not in the Senate. I want to be clear, though, that we do have, and I support, an adversarial system to test ideas. The potential for disagreement or argument or the proper interrogation of ideas should never be avoided nor averted. That does nothing to build trust in politics or democracy. This place must rise to the big issues and engage with them thoughtfully and respectfully. Let us not just be a stage for noisy actors talking at each other, over each other and past each other. Parliament has a responsibility to ensure that the extremes of the left and the right do not set the terms of engagement of ideas in this country, otherwise ideological trenches become deeper and the centre ground becomes no-man's-land. I am a proud moderate. My goal has always been to turn ideas into outcomes. I reject outright the argument that being moderate is a sign of conservatism or apathy. You can be in the centre of Australian political life and be a reformer, be a humanitarian and, indeed, be radical in the terms of your ambition to get things done for the Australian people. I think being a moderate is an acknowledgement that Australians hold broad and diverse and competing views. But the majority in the middle should never be held hostage to the few on the zealous fringe. Personally, I know what good this parliament can do. I think back to the terrible times after the Black Saturday fires of 2009, where 173 of our fellow Australians perished. I saw our investments, informed by more than 50 of my own visits to communities devastated by Black Saturday. And I think back to the class action that spelled the end of robodebt, together with the royal commission to make sure that it can't happen again; better flood insurance definitions, when we listened to Queenslanders who explained how they were dudded in the 2011 floods; our FOFA reforms, shaped by people who'd been ripped off by unethical advice; and an asbestos safety agency and laws against workplace bullying, delivered because we listened to the victims and talked to the experts and examined the evidence. Sometimes progress in parliament takes time. When I was Assistant Treasurer in about 2012 or perhaps 2013, I moved, and we passed, legislation to increase superannuation from nine to 12 per cent. I'm pleased to say that on 1 July, 13 years later, we have reached that milestone. Slowed down by successive governments, it was initiated and has been delivered now by Labor. But closest to my heart, and I know to the hearts of many members here, is the National Disability Insurance Scheme. When I became Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Children's Services in 2007, I thought I'd seen hardship and disadvantage, but nothing prepared me for the way that literally thousands—hundreds of thousands—of Australians with disability and the people who love them were sentenced to a second-class life of lesser opportunity, or for the midnight sleepless anxiety of parents in their 80s wondering who will look after and love their adult child when they no longer can. Together with Bruce Bonyhady, John Walsh, Rhonda Galbally, Kirsten Deane, Bronwyn Morecomb, Jenny Macklin and many others, we created and organised and animated an army of everyday Australians determined to change this. I think the result was the most significant social reform in this century for Australia. But it is something that the whole parliament should take ownership of and pride in. The NDIS belongs alongside Medicare and superannuation as an example of Australian exceptionalism in building the fair go. In creating the NDIS, we didn't look to international precedent but, instead, we created a global precedent, because, at our best, we in this parliament know that the best in the world is only just good enough for the Australian people. The NDIS gives dignity and agency to people with disability. It is by no means perfect, but it is changing hundreds of thousands of lives. Choice and control—its great strength comes from putting people with disability at the centre, trusting them to make decisions. All of this underpinning the NDIS derives from the best of modern Australian values: kindness in another's trouble. The understanding that disability could affect anyone of us or someone we love at any time therefore matters to all of us. I am forever grateful to Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard for the privilege of serving as disability spokesperson and for recognising an idea that's time had come. I want to thank the Prime Minister for the opportunity he gave me to serve in his cabinet to get the NDIS back on track. At its birth and in its repair, I must acknowledge as well, though, that the overwhelming majority of the parliament, the opposition and the government, wanted to make sure of the scheme. Whilst the NDIS was a Labor government initiative, it is not a Labor government issue. This has been parliament at its best. In opposition, I took the same view on national security. We worked constructively with prime ministers Abbott, Turnbull, Morrison. But it was not unquestioning bipartisanship. For example, I think that my decision to oppose the Australia-China extradition treaty has stood the test of time. But I always understood, as did Labor, that dealing with threats of terrorism, foreign interference and homegrown extremism depends on us putting the national interest first. I understand now in a way I never could at the start of my 17 years of service that the party political process is important, but the parliament is even more so. This is the place where the national interest should be pre-eminent over partisanship and ideology. I've mentioned that in regard to industrial relations, to national security and to the NDIS, and I want to talk about some other areas where I think parliament can do better in the future, how future parliaments can best serve the next generation of Australians. This begins with the unfinished business for the nation: climate. Climate change is not a Labor issue or a Liberal issue or a Greens party issue or a teal issue. It's the world we live in, and it's the country we pass on to our grandchildren. It concerns every Australian. So too does the unfinished business of tax reform. At the beginning of this year, the government created fairer income tax cuts for all working Australians, but I still remain convinced our system still taxes property preferentially and lightly and income heavily. As a result, young Australians carry a disproportionate share of the tax burden. Not only do they pay more tax now than others did a generation ago; they also pay more for their education than ever before, and that's why I was so pleased with our government's announcement to help erase some of the burden. And it is harder than ever for young Australians to save for a first home. The government understands increasing supply is the essential part of solving our problem. It's why we're building more homes. We must not become a society where the best predictor of a young person's future likelihood of owning a home is their parents' current bank balance. We also have unfinished business on defence and foreign policy as our world changes. The government has made significant advances in our relationships with old allies and important trading partners, but we need to continue to develop even further our own defence capabilities within the bonds of existing alliances and prioritise even more Australian foreign policy with an Australian accent. There are big nations that threaten our small and close neighbours. The Pacific is not an empty ocean we fly over, rather a blue continent of diverse cultures. And, on the subject of enduring cultures, parliament has unfinished business with our First Nations people. The Uluru process proposed a voice to parliament to help this process. It was a novel idea. Sadly, recognition in our Constitution has become a toxic issue. I remain hopeful that, with good faith on all sides, we can achieve recognition of Indigenous Australians in our nation's birth certificate and genuine empowerment for our First Nations people, including the work of treaties. The traditional owners of this land don't actually ask much from this parliament, but they do ask for recognition of 65,000 years of continuing connection to this continent that we're all lucky to call home. Finally, our parliament and our nation most definitely have unfinished business on the march to the equal treatment of women in Australia, and there is no more shocking indictment or measure of inequality between men and women than violence against women. In this job, in my life, in every battle I've fought and in all the causes I've championed so far, my strength has come from having people believe in me—having people on my side. Now, in my new role as Vice-Chancellor of the University of Canberra, I choose the side of young people. I choose to be on the side of the people who will nurture their inquisitive minds: their lecturers and tutors. I choose to be on the side of the phenomenal researchers whose work impacts our society. I choose to be on the side of the knowledge keepers and the knowledge seekers because they are instrumental to our future. I choose young Australians—their aspirations, their dreams and their education. I choose those who embrace lifelong learning. I'm excited to have new horizons to strive towards in the national interest, consistent with the values that have animated me my whole working life and to give something back to the city of Canberra, which has been, for many of us, our second home for so long. Canberra gets a bad rap, usually because people associate it with us. But its role as the host of our parliament gives it a 'main character' energy—a welcoming and clever community, a culture and arts hub and a magnificent natural environment. It has 447 iconic bus stops. It has more roundabouts than any other city in the world. Soon after the 2019 election loss, I was chatting to some English relatives—well after I'd rescinded my English citizenship. There's scar tissue. They gave me a remarkable dose of perspective. They reminded me that my great-grandfather William Menzies Cameron was a dockworker in Tyneside—perhaps not surprisingly to some, chairman of the shop stewards at the Swan and Palmer dockyards. His daughter—my grandma—was a cleaner, a barmaid and, indeed, an air raid warden during the Blitz. She lived in council housing. Her son—my father—trained as a fitter and turner. He was a seafarer for more than 20 years. He then worked in the definite rough and tumble of the Melbourne ship repair industry. In fact, the family history of seafaring is one of the reasons why I, like the Prime Minister, have always championed a strategic merchant marine fleet, and I acknowledge the work that Minister King is doing on that. My English relatives said to me that my grandma could not have imagined a world where her grandson could be a member of parliament, let alone run for Prime Minister not once but twice. They could not wrap their mind around this country. And, ultimately, it's not a reflection on me. It's a tribute to us, and it's a tribute to our country. Our nation has flourished as the home of the second chance, the land of the fair go—a place where every generation can hope for better for the next. More than anything else, education is what makes that possible. Education is the hope of the world. It has lifted literally millions out of poverty. It has been a force for progress and equality. It is the most reliable path from disadvantage to advantage, and it teaches the critical thinking crucial to preserving our democracy. This is my mother's story. My mother loved the power of education. She loved university. She was the first in her family to attend. Her stock—and I'm surprised the royal commission missed this—were convicts. It was 1831; there's probably a statute of limitations. Her stock were unsuccessful gold prospectors, Eureka rebels and trouble-making left-wing tradies in the mid-20th century. But the first time my twin brother, Robert, and I were at university with mum, we were four years old at the kindergarten while she was lecturing in the education faculty. The next time, Rob and I were in first-year law, and mum was a mature-age law student who, that year, won the Supreme Court Prize. So I actually see this next phase in my life as a chance to pick up some of the threads of what my mother taught my brother and me all those years ago. She used to say: 'Never forget where you come from. Never judge a person by how much money they have or what possessions they own. Instead, everyone has merit. Everyone has value. Everyone deserves the chance to fulfil their potential.' That's what this parliament has been about for me. It's what the next chapter of my life is about. When I announced I would not be contesting the next election, I quoted 'Ole Blue Eyes', Frank Sinatra: Regrets, I've had a few, but then again too few to mention. You do regret your mistakes; you don't forget your failures. Oh, what I would give to go back to election day 2016 and turn that sausage in bread and eat it a different way. Some of your failures become the best of you. I have known in this place extraordinary highs and some painful lows. Good days and hard days and sleepless nights. I would not hand back a single minute of a single hour of a single day that I've spent in this place or in this job. I leave here full of gratitude to all those who've made it possible. I leave here full of optimism for the future of the movement and the party I love, the people we serve and the country we are so fortunate to call home. I have always been and remain ambitious for Australia. This flows through my faith in our people, my optimism in the future, and my deep and abiding love of our nation. I encourage future parliaments to carry this sense of ambition forward. Be ambitious and mature on climate. Be ambitious to be a good neighbour in the Pacific. Be ambitious for Australian foreign policy to have an Australian accent. Be ambitious on tax reform. Be ambitious for a fairer relationship with our First Nations people. But perhaps most of all, be ambitious for the young people of this country who currently feel disenfranchised, disengaged and dismissed by the political process. Be ambitious for what you all can accomplish here. It is a privilege to serve this great democratic institution. It is a privilege to be part of the power to forge a path for a more productive, moderate, compassionate and inclusive Australia. My final advice to future parliamentarians: our time here is finite. Fill every unforgiving minute with 60 seconds of distance run. I and the Australian people will be urging you on and wishing you well. For the last time, I thank the House. 15:49 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler on indulgence—I begin by congratulating my friend Bill Shorten on what was an extraordinary valedictory, which was given an entirely appropriate response of acclamation by all those who are here and will be given by all those who read that speech, because Bill's contribution has been extraordinary. He went through the three phases of that contribution to public life: as a trade union leader of the Australian Workers Union, as the member for Maribyrnong and as a parliamentarian and, importantly, one of the small number of people who've had the privilege of leading Australia's oldest and greatest political party, the Australian Labor Party. The Australian Labor Party formed in 1891 and has had fewer leaders than Australia has had Prime Ministers. For Bill to lead our great party for six years with distinction is something that I know he is quite rightly proud of. The member for Maribyrnong has a big party starting soon as well, and fair enough. I expect the Labor Party might get some of the bill given how many people are here. They are here out of respect for his contribution to public life. Indeed, he has a great deal to celebrate and so much to be proud of. They say in this place that you can't keep a secret, but when I walked out with Bill into the Prime Minister's courtyard to announce what he would be doing with the next part of his life with Chloe and Clem, we were both shocked that sometimes you can keep a secret in this place for a period of time because I think that was kept in confidence. Bill and I had discussions where he informed me that he wanted to look for a new challenge, and it's a new challenge that is consistent with the old challenges that he has not only sought but met—not an easy life, but the next thing he can do to contribute to the country and, in this case, to the education of young Australians and to those people who will go through the next phase of their life looking for a future career. It would have been totally understandable in my view if Bill had chosen to walk away after what was disappointing in 2019. No-one had worked harder to rebuild Labor in opposition. No-one had given more of their time or energy to making the case for a Labor government. As I think only people who have been the Leader of the Opposition would know, it's a tough job. Bill did it with distinction. He did it with commitment. He did it with passion to make a difference and to endeavour not once but twice, as he said, to take Labor back into government. Because, at the end of the day, if you are not in government, you can't make the change to the country that you want to make. So no-one would have thought any less of Bill had he chosen a quiet life. Instead, it will always be to Bill's credit that he channelled that disappointment into fighting for the victims of robodebt. He approached me as the Labor leader and advocated so strongly for a royal commission for the victims of that dark period, that stain on Australian public life that had such a devastating impact—and, in some cases, a final impact—on too many Australians. He then returned to serve as a cabinet minister. He has done so much to get the NDIS back onto a sustainable footing, working across the parliament to achieve the reform that was necessary—a big and complex challenge but so important to the future of our nation and the lives of people with disability. Across three Labor governments—and there aren't many people who have served in three Labor governments as ministers—Bill has done big things. But he's also done small things that have made a big difference. He's always been someone interested in ideas, in change and in how things work and how they can work even better. The clearest illustration of that is that Bill started his parliamentary career as the parliamentary secretary for disabilities and leaves here as the Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme. Bill, your story is one of service—service to the AWU and the labour movement, service to the Australian Labor Party and, most importantly, service to the people of Australia. We know that is a story in which you are now going to write the next chapter—off to a new role at the University of Canberra. I'm sure the Minister for Education is bracing for a lot of constructive engagement, the odd bit of advice and the odd representation! It is not a member of the Group of Eight but perhaps the Group of Eight might become the 'Group of Nine', given your history of making a difference wherever you have been. You've given so much to the parliament, to Labor, to the trade union movement and to Australia. We know that you have more to give, and we know that Chloe and your wonderful family have been with you. We can't do it without our families. To them: on behalf of the Australian Labor Party, I thank you for the sacrifice you have made as well. It's not easy. You were there campaigning through two terms, two election campaigns, and for much longer than that—for six of the electoral cycles we have gone through. I thank you for your extraordinary contribution as well. I'll see you all down the road and have a beer; look forward to it! Well done, Bill. 15:57 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson on indulgence—Thank you for a masterclass performance, Bill. That was a remarkable speech, reflected by the acclamation across the gallery and across the chamber. The respect that people here have for you on both sides of the chamber, and, indeed, across the broader community, should be obvious to you today. I think perhaps the classiest part of your speech was how you started with family. I think it was a window into your values and the way you have viewed your tasks—and not just your family but the Labor family, the union family and the workers and their families that you represented and that you fought for in their darkest hour. I say to Chloe, Rupert, Gigi and Clementine: you have been part of an amazing team. You've been through the highs and lows, reading things about Bill online that you know not to be true, and the savagery and the harsh nature of modern day public life—particularly for the Leader of the Opposition, I might say on indulgence! Some of it is true but not all of it! But your family do feel it. They go through the highs and the lows, and sometimes it's something you don't want them to share or be exposed to. But, Bill, you've always been there to guard your beautiful wife and children and all those who have meant so much to you. I agree with your assessment in relation to the fine institutions that you mentioned in your speech. I think the AWU, through its long history and through different periods—up and down periods, as you pointed out—has been able to serve the Australian public and the workers of that union with great distinction. I, too, agree with you that the Australian Labor Party is one of the great institutions of this country—one of the two great political parties in this country, I hasten to add, just in case I'm quoted without the second qualification of that particular contribution! There was, for the sake of Hansard, a comma but not a full stop in-between those two points that I made. And I say that in all sincerity. I had a great deal of respect for Kim Beazley. I watched him from afar, and I watched him up close, having come into this parliament in 2001. I think he would have made a fine prime minister of this country. He shared many of the values and the love of the Australian Labor Party that Bill Shorten does, and I draw the same conclusion in relation to Bill Shorten. Knowing his intellect, his political capacity and the respect that he has for his value structure, he would have gone on to become a very good prime minister of our country. Fortunately, that was not the case, because we won the election! It's tough though. I felt for him on election night at a human level. There was a reasonable—very reasonable—expectation that Labor would win that election in 2019. For a number of circumstances, that wasn't to be the case. That hurt him, and it hurt many of those close to him, including many on the front bench, and I acknowledge that. Politics is a rough-and-tumble business, but, in the end, it's how you come into this place and it's how you go out. The way that Bill Shorten came into this place was covered in glory in terms of his career, and he leaves this place covered in glory because of the sacrifice that he has made and that his family have made to the causes that are important to him and that are important to our country. I also enjoyed, I might say, as a closing remark, the time with Bill on the Today show as well. I'm sure Karl and Sarah send their best to you as well. If only I had known more about the family tree, I could have given you more stick on the Today show about the convict history and other elements of it selectively chosen for the purpose of some sick, poor joke that we'd make against each other on a Friday morning. It has demonstrated, I think, part of Bill's character that many Australians have benefited from seeing. I said to a journalist the other day, off the record, of course, that I think there is a huge loss to the Australian Labor Party because, observing from afar—I say this gratuitously—my judgement is, with all due respect to some of my friends on the front bench and some of my enemies on the front bench, that he has the best political judgement on the front bench of the Australian Labor Party. He will be a loss to the party, and he will be a loss to the Labor cause. But he goes now onto the next stage of his life, of his career. He will make a significant mark there as well, and we wish him every health and success in that next phase of life. MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE 69 MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE Housing 69 16:03 The SPEAKER 53517 I have received a letter from the honourable member for Deakin proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely: The housing crisis which is putting the Australian dream at risk. I call upon those honourable members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places. More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places— 16:03 Mr SUKKAR 242515 Deakin MPIs are really all about fire and brimstone. I think, given the wonderful contribution we've just seen from the member for Maribyrnong, the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition, I will try to find the right tone. But the truth here is that there's no doubt in Australia right now that, when talking and reflecting on some of the comments of the member for Maribyrnong, when we think about young Australians, think about their opportunities and think about the solemn duty that we all have as members of parliament to hand on a country and a future that offers more to the next generation than we had ourselves, this government is massively failing in relation to housing. It doesn't matter how much the Minister for Housing gets up and rattles off a range of talking points that have no meaning, that are delivering nothing for Australians. It's not helping the next generation of Australians who, quite frankly, right now don't believe that even if they do they right things—work hard, improve themselves, improve their lot in life, make wise decision—they will ever be able to own a home in this country. That's why today's MPI is titled 'The housing crisis which is putting the Australian dream at risk'. I think the biggest shame from this government is that they have waved the white flag on homeownership. We've not heard anything meaningful from the government on homeownership in 2½ years. And now, 2½ years later, they are desperately scrambling around, trying to find some sort of narrative on housing. But the inconvenient truth for the failed minister, for the housing minister, for this failed Prime Minister is that the numbers don't lie; the scoreboard doesn't lie. There's no point sitting at the footy and screaming at the umpires, bagging your opponents. In the end, the scoreboard tells the story. And on every single metric that you can measure housing on in this country, things are demonstrably worse as a result of the poor decisions of this government—on every single metric. The housing minister gets up every question time and says the answer to our housing crisis is to be build more homes. So why on earth are they building fewer homes? We have rarely, in recent history, seen housing supply get to the level that it is at now. We had housing approvals at just 158,000, the lowest we've seen for decades. The problem with housing approvals being down is that it means that if the housing crisis is bad now then it's just going to get worse. Those housing approvals are for the homes that will be built over the next 12 to 18 to 24 months. So, if those housing approvals are down, I have very bad news for any Australians who are watching this debate: this housing crisis is set to get worse. As a result of fewer homes being built, fewer homes being approved and fewer homes being completed, we see that rents have gone up by 25 per cent since this government came into office. We see Australians who have a mortgage paying more than $25,000 more in interest on their mortgage repayments—that is an additional $25,000 in after-tax income just to service a mortgage. And we see nothing meaningful whatsoever from this government to assist first-home buyers. So we've got fewer homes built, we've got fewer homes in the pipeline to be built, and in effect the government is saying, 'Well, there's nothing really we can do here, although we've got a $32 billion housing program'—a totality of $32 billion in programs devoted to housing. We're not in the first six months of this government. We're not being unreasonable to ask the government, 'How many homes has your so-called $32 billion housing program built?' It's built none! This is the dirty secret of the government. This government, because of programs they have put in place, have not delivered one new home. We're not talking about an unreasonable opposition in the first five minutes of a government asking, 'How many homes have you built?' It's 2½ years later. We're on the eve of the next election, and the government's going to be going to that election saying: 'Trust us to fix the housing problem that we've done absolutely nothing about in 2½ years'—three years, by then. Not one single home has been built under any policy brought forward by this government. It's an absolute disgrace, yet we have the new housing minister, the failed former minister, who gets up in question time and says that the government is doing all it can. The government has done nothing. The only thing I will commend the government on is trying to rebadge and take ownership of coalition policies. The minister gets up in the House and talks about having helped people through the Home Guarantee Scheme. Can I remind the housing minister that the Home Guarantee Scheme is a proud coalition achievement? It is a proud coalition policy to help first home buyers, rather than having to save the full 20 per cent deposit, to purchase a home with a five per cent deposit, supported by a government guarantee. When we announced that policy and when I implemented it, Kristina Keneally called it socialism. The government was scoffing at the policy. Now, it's the only policy that's meaningfully supporting first home buyers. Not only did we put in place the Home Guarantee Scheme, which is now helping nearly 40 per cent of all first home buyers, but we put in place the First Home Super Saver Scheme, a scheme to help people accelerate their savings through superannuation. At the last election, we took to the election a policy to help first home buyers get over the deposit hurdle by getting access to a portion of their super for a deposit and then being required to put it back into super when they sold their home. What we did as a government every single day was wake up and think, 'What can we do to help young Australians get into a home?' Yes, we're going to cop flak from the opposition for doing it. Yes, they're going to fight us every step of the way. But, if we do it and it works, in the end they will become converts. Well, they have become converts on the First Home Super Saver Scheme and on the Home Guarantee Scheme. They promised to abolish them, and they haven't, presumably because they understand that these are policies that work, but they have delivered nothing for first home buyers. Today we see the Minister for Housing accusing the coalition—the party of homeownership and the only party, quite frankly, in this parliament who still fights for young Australians to own a home—of blocking their Help to Buy scheme. I will say unashamedly that we are blocking their Help to Buy scheme because it will do nothing. It will do absolutely nothing. It's the sort of policy you come up with when you want to have something to talk about but you really don't want to do anything meaningful. Their Help to Buy scheme is a vanilla shared-equity scheme. Almost every state and territory around this country has had or has at the moment a shared-equity product that's offered to its citizens. Guess what? In New South Wales, their shared-equity scheme, virtually identical to the Help to Buy scheme, still has around 90 per cent of its places available because Australians don't want the Prime Minister at their kitchen table. They don't want to be booted out of their home when their income gets above a certain level. They don't want to be the ones that have to wear all of the repairs and the maintenance and the costs associated with a home just to have the government come along when they sell it and say, 'Give us our 40 per cent of the proceeds, even though you've paid for and maintained this property.' It's a Claytons policy. On this side of the House and in the lead-up to the election, there are two parties, the Liberal and National parties, who will be fighting for first home buyers in this country. It will be the defining feature of the next election, and it will be the reason why we become the government after that election. 16:13 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fenner At the outset, I acknowledge the remarkable valedictory speech that the House has heard from the member for Maribyrnong. On a personal note, it was a real honour to serve as a shadow minister when the member for Maribyrnong was the Leader of the Labor Party, and it is a great honour to serve alongside him as an assistant minister in the Albanese government. It's pretty extraordinary to hear the words of the former housing minister and now shadow housing minister. It's no surprise that he has scurried out of the chamber, given his lacklustre record when it came to housing. Under the former government, for most of their time in office, we didn't have a housing minister. Under the former government, homeownership rates in Australia fell to a 50-year low. Under the former government, building approvals were at an almost decadal low. Under the former government, there was a skills deficit through the entire construction industry. Under the former government, they went for their last five years failing to hold a meeting of state and territory housing ministers. Under the former government, social housing increased by less than 10,000 homes over nine years, compared to a 30,000-home increase under the Labor government that had preceded them. It is certainly true that the Liberal Party once cared about housing. But that ended with the end of the Menzies era. The fact is the Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison governments didn't give two hoots about housing policy. Instead, they pursued policies that actively made problems worse. We've just had the COVID-19 response inquiry report handed down, co-authored by Robyn Kruk, Catherine Bennett and Angela Jackson. This is what they had to say about the former government's HomeBuilder program, championed by the now shadow minister for housing: There are clear indications that the infrastructure measures taken – in particular, HomeBuilder – overheated the industry and contributed to inflation in the post-pandemic era. The program was designed explicitly to stimulate aggregate demand and support the residential construction sector. It acted to stimulate consumption expenditure and lowered the significant household savings built up during the pandemic. However, the measure failed to appropriately take into account the supply-side effects of the pandemic. It goes on to quote the HomeBuilder national partner agreement review: stakeholder consultation report: It could be said that the HomeBuilder did partially contribute to the constraints in supply of labour, materials and land that resulted from this industry overheating. The report goes on to say: Recent media articles have also criticised the HomeBuilder program in particular for favouring middle- to high-income earners rather than lower income earners. And it notes that it contributed to inflation costs. The program blew out to five times the expected budget. Also under the former government, we had them go to their final election—which, fortunately nor the Australian people, they lost—with a policy that you should be able to raid your superannuation to pay for a home, a policy Malcolm Turnbull referred to as 'the craziest idea I have heard'. When the former government came to office, the average home cost around seven years earnings. By the time they left office, the average home cost around 11 years earnings. According to the data crunched in Battlers and Billionaires: The Updated Story of Inequality in Australia, throughout the period from 1880 to 2022, housings affordability was never as bad as when the former government left office. They left us with an unholy housing mess to clean up. We have been focusing on doing that. We have set an ambitious target of 1.2 million homes over five years, aiming to galvanise efforts across all levels of government and industry. We are working with states and territories to unlock land, improve zoning and build the infrastructure we need to support new homes. We're training the tradies we need through fee-free TAFE and bringing in more tradies from overseas. We're directly investing in more housing through the Housing Australia Future Fund, which in just its first round is directly helping more social housing than the previous government did in nine years. Relevant to my competition portfolio, we are working with states and territories through national competition policy to explore opportunities to remove barriers to the uptake of modern construction methods. Right now the planning system in industry is geared towards traditional on-site construction methods. National competition policy will look at ways to level the regulatory playing field, delivering significant cost savings and reducing construction times. It's also good for our net zero transition, with less waste generated from an uptake in off-site construction. Under Labor we're helping renters doing it tough. We've had back-to-back increases in Commonwealth rent assistance, boosting Commonwealth rent assistance by 40 per cent, helping around a million Australians. More affordable homes are absolutely critical to tackling inequality in Australia, and since Labor came to office nearly 4,000 homes have been built, boosted by Labor's policies like fee-free TAFE and by training the workers we need to build homes. That includes more than 10,000 homes built through Labor's housing programs like the Social Housing Accelerator program and new builds under Labor's expanded Home Guarantee Scheme. We've got more than 20,000 homes in the pipeline through direct Commonwealth investment, including the 13,700 under round 1 of the Housing Australia Future Fund. Right now, we have the unholy coalition of the Liberals and Nationals and the Greens blocking two significant housing measures. The 'build to rent' and Help to Buy bills are being stalled by the Liberals and the Nationals, who don't want to see more young Australians able to buy a home, and by the Greens, who are the housing supply denialists of Australia. Their spokesman has said that Australia has enough homes, against evidence from every serious think-tank in Australia and the fact that Australia has fewer homes per person than the average advanced country. The Greens policy on housing is to support rent caps. As the Economist magazine recently noted of a similar policy pursued by the Scottish National Party and its then ally the Green Party, they temporarily capped rent increases at three per cent a year. A new housing bill allows ministers to control rents for longer. As a result, as the Economist magazine noted, in a panic some developers cancelled build-to-rent projects. Others switched from rental flats to student rooms, which are not covered by the bill. The fact is that housing markets have a supply side too, and, when you put into place rental caps of the kind that the Greens would suggest you're simply going to cause a housing supply shortage. I point to the ACT—a jurisdiction which doesn't have an absolute rental price cap. The ACT has limits on the extent to which any one landlord can raise rents above the ACT average. You have, from the coalition, a claim that labour costs are driving up the challenge of housing affordability. Treasury analysis shows very clearly that labour costs in the most recent year were 18.7 per cent of total costs, compared to 19.6 per cent of total costs before that. In building construction, labour costs are significantly less than the average for the construction sector as a whole. Labour costs in construction have been growing more slowly than other costs. So attempts to blame workers in the housing industry for housing supply challenges are simply off base. We need assistance from this parliament to put in place those build-to-rent and help-to-buy measures so we can do more, but even without that support we're strengthening renters' rights. The housing minister is meeting with state and territory counterparts. We're building more affordable rental homes and we're taking action after a decade of inaction from the former Liberal-National government. While they had programs like HomeBuilder which made the inflation challenge worse for Australia, we're putting in place programs to boost housing supply in this country. Labor understands that housing supply is at the core of dealing with inequality and opportunity in this country. We're getting on with the job. We're building. We need the Liberals, the Nationals and the Greens to stop blocking and let us start building. 16:24 Ms 300123 Hughes WARE () (): I rise to speak on this matter of public importance—and, indeed, is there any issue in our country at the moment that is not more important than the issue of housing? It is talked about at barbecues. It's spoken about around the water coolers at work. It's spoken about at dinner parties. We speak about it constantly in this place. Most worrying for me is that, for the first time in my life, we have teenagers who are suffering mental health issues and talking about their stress and anxiety about being unable to buy a home. When I was a teenager back in the 1980s, I recall worrying about a lot of things but never about whether or not I would be able to buy a home. This government was elected on the campaign promise of cheaper mortgages and cheaper rents, and it has failed abysmally. I have no doubt that the intention is there—the 1.2 million homes they've spruiked, the billions and billions of dollars going into trying to solve this—but it is not being solved. The houses that the former housing minister and now the current housing minister have said will be built haven't been built. I accept a lot of the things the minister just said then about housing being an absolute social imperative. But the bank of mum and dad is now the sixth biggest lender for homes. That means, for the first time in the history of this nation, whether or not you own a home will largely depend on the circumstances of your birth. That is a travesty, and that is something we must fix. It is something I came into this parliament to fix, as a former planning, environmental and housing lawyer, having worked in both the private sector and the public sector. In my first speech in this place I said I want to fix housing. We need to fix housing supply. With all respect to those on the other side, the minister talking about having meetings with state ministers—that's been occurring for over a decade, and nothing has changed. It's a talkfest. We need to empower the local government sector. We have now got the slowest and the lowest number of housing approvals in the history of local government, which started in 1919 in the great state of NSW. What is needed at that level? First of all, the reason DAs are taking so long is that we have a chronic shortage of planners in this country. But, when I hear those on the other side talking about free TAFE and all the other allegedly fabulous things they're doing to address the skills sector, I don't hear anyone over there talking about what they're doing to address the chronic shortage of planners in this country. They are the ones needed to prepare the DAs for developers and then to approve them at local council level. They are also the experts who have to do the up-zonings and the rezonings in all of the local government areas throughout our country to increase housing supply. I have never heard the Minister for Housing and I haven't heard the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government talking about any of this. That says to me that with all the goodwill and intention in the world on that side—and I have no doubt that they want to fix the housing problem. There is no-one on that side, with respect to them, who even understands the problem at a grassroots level. Until we start looking at that and until we start talking about that— Ms WARE 300123 I hear the member for Hasluck. The member for Hasluck exactly has the same things being said to her in her electorate as they're saying to me in Hughes. They are saying, 'The government's been in for 2½ years and it hasn't fixed our housing issues in Hasluck.' You know it. We know it. The whole country knows it. We must fix this housing crisis for the good— (Time expired) ADJOURNMENT 73 ADJOURNMENT Climate Change 73 16:29 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah Overnight, the annual Climate Change Performance Index was released. The index compares the climate action performance of 63 countries and the EU, which account for more than 90 per cent of global climate emissions. Disappointingly, Australia's ranking has dropped from 50 to 52. This morning, with Australian Conservation Foundation and colleagues from the crossbench, I called on the government to do better when it comes to climate action and emissions reduction, and stop enabling the increase of coal and gas production. The Albanese government needs to go harder and faster in addressing the climate crisis. While I welcome the Treasurer's announcement this morning, to direct the Future Fund and the sum of $230 billion to focus on green energy and infrastructure, I should note for the detractors and those complaining that, to date, the Future Fund has invested in banks, airlines, supermarkets, fossil-fuel companies and mining companies. To now direct it towards industries such as housing and renewables, that will actually benefit the future of Australia, I think is a good thing. Of course, though, it cannot be politicised. I would call on the Future Fund and, in fact, call on the government to stop approving the exploration of more coal and gas, and, in particular, gas in WA—we have a number of decisions before the government. It is urgent and imperative that they do not go ahead, and that they do not benefit from further public subsidy. To add insult to injury, the government's Future Gas Strategy, which was launched in May, envisages that Australia continues to open up massive, new gas fields and continues to burn and export fossil fuels well beyond 2050. At a time when climate milestones are being reached and we are passing tipping points, the need for ambitious policies and strong leadership has never been so important. So I call on the government to, in fact, do that. Don't just give us words and posturing at COP events, but actually follow through with real action—a strong 2035 target—and stop approving more extraction of gas. Gas is putting fuel on the fire of global warming and it is just reckless negligence to continue doing that. I do welcome the climate minister's statement at COP29 that he'll acknowledge the need to deliver a nationally determined contribution under the Paris Agreement with the 'highest possible ambition', but forgive my slight cynicism when it's followed by the fact that he doesn't intend to indicate or come clean to the Australian people how ambitious he intends to be prior to the next election, and we certainly are not hearing anything from the opposition. So the Australian people should be incredibly concerned that the two major parties are failing on the biggest issue that impacts their cost of living and their safety. We are already on track to two degrees of global warming and we're experiencing the effects of it with record once-in-100-year flooding and catastrophic bushfires. They become more and more frequent. Climate risk continues to escalate and it is costing our communities. It is ordinary Australian people who are paying the price for this reckless negligence that continues, government after government. The parliament has spent many hours talking about action on cost-of-living pressures. That is a crisis that is fuelled, in part, by the increasing costs to home insurance premiums due to the intensifying of climate change and increasing risks. Increasing extreme weather events mean that it is costing the Australian people and the government substantially in economic losses. A warming climate also means food and water become more scarce and more expensive. There's no other way to explain it to people in relation to those cost-of-living pressures. Allianz Insurance recently told a parliamentary inquiry that it had increased average premiums across its household portfolio by a cumulative 56 per cent over three years, due to climate risks. What we know on the ground, speaking with people in Warringah and seeing it in the local Facebook groups and chats that are alive with people sharing experiences, is that home insurance premiums are increasing a median of 28 per cent across the board. If you out there don't actually accept the science of climate change and you think that this is a problem that someone else is going to deal with—trust me, you are also going to pay for it, because climate risk is going to be averaged across all of your insurance premiums. Everyone will pay for this, and, ultimately, the government will pay because communities are not safe and government will have to subsidise the consequences, instead of the fossil fuel companies. They should be held responsible to pay for the damage that they are causing. McEwen Electorate: Infrastructure, Australian Defence Force Parliamentary Program 74 16:34 Mr ROB MITCHELL M3E McEwen Today I'm pleased to provide an update on some of the many infrastructure projects the Albanese Labor government are delivering in our communities, because, unlike the Liberals, we have been delivering on our election commitments and standing up for the communities of McEwen. There's the Macedon Ranges regional sports precincts—nine years we had to wait because the Liberal Party refused to fund it. In fact, the only time they mentioned they would fund it was about two minutes before the election was called in 2022—two minutes before. They had no interest in it, never did anything and never funded it. But we put in $15 million, and we're about ready to kick off the stage 2 build. I'm looking forward to seeing all the superstars in the area that are going to have the opportunity to play sports in decent facilities that were neglected by the LNP's people opposite. Second is Greenhill Reserve in Wallan oval 2. The Greenhill Reserve upgrade was completed this year and officially opened in June 2024. It means that more kids can play cricket and more kids can play football—and more adults can—in this rapidly rising area of the southern part of Mitchell shire. It's estimated that 3,200 people, including players, umpires, officials and spectators, will use the facility each year. Then there's the Doreen splash park. Today I met with newly elected councillor Deb Gunn to discuss this important splash park. The Albanese government provided $1.5 million, along with $500,000 from the state government and $900,000 from the council, to build a splash park that's free and easy for families to go to. It's a much-needed recreational space. It's also going to have BBQs, pavilions and public amenities, making it a fantastic place to take the kids out for the day. Earthworks have commenced on this, and we're looking forward to seeing the rest of the infrastructure installed in the coming months. Then there's the Bridge Inn Road upgrade, which is actually about to be finished ahead of time. It's part of the roads package that was put forward jointly by the federal and state governments. When this road's finished, it's going to double the capacity. It means that it will save more time for our families going to and from work, to and from school or to and from leisure and sporting activities. It also means that it's a lot safer. These are investments in growing communities that our government has been doing, because, for nine years, those opposite never delivered on one promise—never delivered on one promise—to the people of the outer suburbs while they were in government. This is the stark contrast between what Labor does and what Liberals promise. They do lots of press releases but no delivery. Yan Yean Road stage 2 is another one. This year we committed another $437 million to the suburban roads upgrade package, which includes funding for Yan Yean stage 2. Now, you would have thought that, in areas like these where these sorts of roads are needed, you'd get support from the opposition. But no—again. They refused to fund it, never stepped in and never did anything. Now they sit there and say, 'You should hurry up and get on with the job of fixing it.' What we've done in two years is got it together, got it funded and got it happening—whereas, for nine years, not a thing. It's a very, very stark contrast. There's the Watson Street interchange. This is an absolute ripper. When the National Party member for Riverina was the Deputy Prime Minister, he came out and he committed to it. But, as we know, the National Party breeds infighting; he was gone. The member for New England was installed, and the money disappeared. In fact, what ended up happening was that the promise to fix the Hume freeway that the Morrison government made—they took the money out of that and then put that press-release money against the Watson Street interchange. So there was no money for either project. In fact, we've got the letter there. And those opposite sit there and say, 'Gee whiz, why are we having trouble?' Mr ROB MITCHELL M3E All you've done is put out press releases. You have not delivered one thing. We've delivered budget surpluses. You've delivered deficits—a trillion dollars of Liberal debt, and they couldn't fund simple things like this. Lastly, I want to mention the ADF exchange program. I had the honour of hosting an ADF member as part of the ADF Parliamentary Program. We welcomed Warrant Officer Class 2 David Kelly-Grimshaw into our office. David had a great time because we made sure that everything was open. He got to see what was happening, all of the different lobby things that happen around here—the wonderful events—and to see how the days work and to see the different things that we do. I'm not picking on David, but he had to go home early the other night because he couldn't keep up with all the things that we have to go and see and do and keep up with and be part of and try to remember! But he is an excellent example of our ADF members. I think he's a true professional and an absolute gentleman. It was an honour for our office to be able to spend time with him, hear his story, talk to him, get his views and his understanding. He is an absolute representative of the ADFPP we're proud of. Economy 75 16:39 Mr PIKE 300120 Bowman It has been the great promise of this country that every generation could hand down to their children a nation that's more prosperous and has a higher standard of living than the one they inherited. We've had world wars, depressions and natural disasters, but each generation has been able to live up to that promise. But when I see our current trajectory across many measurements, I fear that Australia, under this Prime Minister, is heading in the wrong direction. Our households are far worse off than they were three years ago. We've been stuck in the worst per capita recession in 50 years. We've had a homegrown inflation crisis pushing up the cost of living. With high interest rates and a rental crisis, we've seen disposable incomes fall dramatically. With excessive regulation, our industries are finding it impossible to compete with their hands tied behind their backs. Our way of life is under threat, not just from foreign actors but from those who want to curtail our freedoms at home. If we don't correct course, I fear that for the first time we will not be able to hand a stronger Australia to the next generation. As a nation that prides itself on being a commonwealth with the common interest at heart, the key metric that we should be using to determine our progress is gross domestic product per capita—in other words, the amount of wealth that Australia is creating for every Australian. On this measure, we've seen six quarters of negative growth. Australians are getting poorer, and they're getting poorer at a rate that we haven't seen in half a century. Since the Labor government was elected, we've seen the weakest economic growth since 1991. We've seen 23,600 business insolvencies, the worst number on record. We've seen productivity fall by 6.3 per cent. When faced with weak growth and falling productivity, the government has been determined to massively increase immigration to try to give the economy an artificial boost. Since the election, we've seen more than 1.5 million people invited to Australia by this government. That's more than the population of the city of Adelaide in less than three years. Is it any wonder Australians are feeling the pressure when they're in line-ups for rental properties or when they're trying to get home after a day of work? Recently, Russell Field, the newly elected LNP member for Capalaba, and I presented flags to four wonderful student leaders of the Capalaba State College junior school. They're very bright kids with a big future ahead of them, but I couldn't help but feel that these kids, who probably don't have the support of wealthy parents, may never be able to afford their own homes in the city where they live. If we continue like this, we'll be breaking that intergenerational promise of a brighter future that those children deserve. But that wouldn't be anything new from this Labor government, who've broken many promises. The Prime Minister promised that his government would deliver cheaper mortgages. While interest rates are coming down in the US, the UK, Canada and New Zealand, we've had 12 interest rate increases under this government. Labor promised a $275 reduction in our energy bills. When you take away the manipulation of the subsidies, the underlying price of electricity has risen by 30 per cent. Labor promised no new taxes, yet in this term we've seen the introduction of Labor's retirement wealth tax, changes that entrench income tax bracket creep, and franking credit clawbacks that will cost Australians $1.5 billion. This government promised us a million new homes. In reality, they're missing that target by 400,000, and building activity has reached its lowest point in over a decade. Beyond all the talk, beyond all of the promises, beyond all those big statistics, there is a simple question that I'm asking the constituents within my electorate when I'm going door to door. I'm simply asking: are you better off today than you were three years ago? Of course, the resounding answer to that has been no. When I go door to door—my colleagues will know that I pride myself on the number of doors I've been knocking on across my electorate, speaking to Australian families, a lot of whom didn't vote for me at the last election—the resounding answer that they give me is that they're not happy with the progress that's been made under this government and that they're looking for real action to try to drive down inflation, drive down the cost of living and, more importantly for a lot of these households, give their children the opportunity to look forward and to think of a brighter Australia where they will be able to enjoy the same benefits and opportunities that their parents and, in my neck of the woods, where there are a lot of older Australians, their grandparents have been able to enjoy. So, as we round out the final days, this could well be the penultimate week, or we could be back for a few days in the new year. When I look back at the progress that's been made in this term, I think that a lot of the constituents in my electorate will be very concerned with the direction in which we're heading and will be looking forward to getting Australia back on track. Vietnamese Community in Australia, Federal Parliamentary Interfaith Breakfast 76 16:44 Dr MULINO 132880 Fraser Today I would like to begin by talking about the enormous contribution the Vietnamese community has made and continues to make in the western suburbs of Melbourne through volunteerism and commitment to community. The Vietnamese community in my electorate of Fraser has made the extraordinary effort of raising more than half a million dollars for the new Footscray hospital. Between the Vietnamese Community in Australia, the VCA Victoria Chapter, their fundraising dinner earlier in August and the recent event held by the Quang Minh Temple, over $530,000 have been raised to date. These funds will be used to help with the development of the new hospital, which is set to open in 2025. This hospital is one of the largest-ever health infrastructure projects in Victoria or, indeed, Australia's history and will make it easier for Victorians in Melbourne's west to find the support they need when they need it and where they need it. Online donations for the fundraiser will remain open until lunar new year, after which the final amount raised will be donated in February next year. I'd like to extend my admiration to the Vietnamese Scout groups, the veterans association, Australian Vietnamese Arts and the Australian Vietnamese Women's Association for the generous contributions and their participation in ensuring that the evening and all of the various fundraising events were a success. Further, I would like to thank Happy Receptions for providing catering for both events. Happy Receptions is a focal point of our community in the west, hosting so many important events and often doing so in a generous way where it contributes to holding of the event. I would also like to thank the Catholic and Buddhist communities that greatly assisted with the fundraising effort and helped make the evening memorable. Finally, to the Bonsai Club and the senior groups of Grimbank: thank you for your attendance and your generosity in helping to reach such an incredible goal. Although the significance of these fundraising events cannot be understated, they represent only two of the many efforts that decorate the Vietnamese community's long history of volunteering and community service. The Vietnamese community, of course, has raised significant funds after natural disasters such as the bushfires several years ago and after the earthquakes in Turkiye. Next year, the community will be celebrating the 50th anniversary of the end of Vietnam War and, importantly, 50 years of settlement in Australia. That community has achieved so much and given so much in those five decades. These fundraising efforts were part of the theme, 'Thank you Australia', which will be prevalent throughout events in 2025 to celebrate the 50th milestone—although, as I say so often at Vietnamese community events, the thankyou really should go the other way. The long history of service reflects the strength that can be found in diversity. Once again I'd like to recognise the Quang Minh Temple and VCA Victoria for hosting these events and, further, for their wider service to Melbourne's west. I look forward to later opportunities to highlight the work of these groups in 2025 when we celebrate 50 years of settlement. Today in parliament the annual Federal Parliamentary Interfaith Breakfast was held. It is now one of the most significant events on the parliamentary calendar. Today's event was the 10th interfaith breakfast celebrating the strength of diverse faith communities and the positive impact that they have made to Australia. At a time when geopolitical, ethnic and religious tensions are heightened globally, the interfaith breakfast and events like it are a reminder that social unity, peace, tolerance and democracy are critical strengths of our culture and our nation. I acknowledge that adversity is being experienced by people of all faiths and that interfaith relations are key to fostering positive dialogues between political and religious leaders while also keeping Australians united. Faith groups in my electorate of Fraser are extremely important in the community. They support members, enable them to celebrate and preserve culture and provide a safe place to socialise. I was so pleased that this year we were able to invite faith leaders from our communities to join the breakfast. I thank representatives from faith groups who made the trek to Canberra: from the Quang Minh Temple, Venerable Thic Phuoc Tan; from the Australian Light Foundation, Hamdi Koyu; from the Melbourne Mandir, Nimesh Patel; and from Our Lady of the Immaculate Conception and the Chin community, Fr Lal Zin Thang and Rual Lian Thang. There were other faith communities that had very much wanted to attend but due to logistical challenges weren't able to, and I acknowledge them also. Multiculturalism and diverse faith is part of Australia's great success story, so I thank all of those this morning from my community who attended. Greater Whitsunday Alliance, Head to the Hill 2024, Australian Defence Force Parliamentary Program, Road Safety 77 16:49 Mr WILLCOX 286535 Dawson This week we welcomed the GW3 delegation to Canberra. GW3 is an advocacy group led by CEO Kylie Porter. On this occasion, it was local government's turn to attend Parliament House. The group comprised Scott Owens, CEO of Mackay Regional Council—Mayor Greg Williamson sent his apologies; Mayor Kelly Vea Vea from Isaac Regional Council; Cale Dendle, CEO of Isaac Regional Council; Mayor Ry Collins from Whitsunday Regional Council; and Warren Bunker, CEO of Whitsunday Regional Council. This powerful group met with opposition leader Peter Dutton, Leader of the Nationals David Littleproud, shadow infrastructure minister Bridget McKenzie, and many current ministers and advisers. The No. 1 priority that GW3 wanted to discuss was the need for an increase in funding for the Bruce Highway and the Peak Downs Highway. They spoke at multiple roundtables, calling for the federal government to reinstate the funding model where the federal government pays 80 per cent and the states pay 20 per cent. Currently, the Labor government is only funding fifty-fifty, which is clearly not enough. The coalition confirmed that, if elected, they would restore the funding to the traditional split. GW3 highlighted the massive contribution that the region provides in both royalties and export earnings, and said very clearly that all they would like is a little bit of funding in return. That way they can keep doing what they're doing—providing prosperity for their area and all of Australia. I often get calls or visits in my Dawson electorate from residents sharing matters that are close to their heart—like Sandy and Colin. Sadly, Colin's life was turned upside down when he was diagnosed with cancer in 2007. But he's still living as best as he can. Sandy really wanted to go to 'Head to the Hill'—that event was to raise awareness about brain cancer—but she was unable to make it. So she reached out and asked me if I could attend on her behalf. Of course I said yes, without any hesitation. The event was also a chance for political figures and community to come together to honour those who have sadly passed. The lawn in the courtyard at parliament was covered in shoes, which represented lives lost to brain cancer. I took the time to do a little message, which I sent off to Sandy and Colin, and I got a fantastic response back. Sandy: thank you very much for that lovely message you sent back to me. I really appreciate it. Colin: all the best—and a shout-out to former junior citizen of the year, their son, William. I've had the honour this week of hosting Squadron Leader Michael Jones from the Royal Australian Air Force as part of the ADF parliamentary exchange program—and he's here with me in the chamber today. The ADF parliamentary exchange is a unique opportunity provided by parliament to members of our Defence Force. The exchange provides participants with an insight into parliamentary and committee processes and an understanding of departments that operate within Parliament House. Michael has gained an appreciation of the extensive and varied activities undertaken by senators and members. Michael is the second ADF parliamentary exchange participant I've welcomed into my office. Previously I had a corporal from the Army, now I've got a squadron leader from the Air Force, and maybe at some point I might end up with someone from the Navy! I really enjoy these opportunities to interact with our Defence Force, because they are truly fine, fine men and women who look after our country and keep us safe. Without them we really haven't got much. I also had the chance to participate in the reciprocal ADF exchange program in Puckapunyal. I was looked after absolutely tremendously well. It's a tough gig, I tell you what! Those guys from the artillery range were picking up shells that were about 50 kilos, and they were throwing them around like they were lollies. Their strength and everything that the ADF put into their arrangements was unbelievable. My heart goes out to the ADF. They keep us safe. They do an absolutely amazing job. Last but not least, last night I was at a cocktail event where V8 Supercar driver and Australian Road Safety Foundation ambassador Craig Lowndes and Paralympian Ryley Batt were guest speakers. These guys talked about keeping safe on our roads. With Christmas just around the corner, I ask everybody to take their time, slow down and get their family home safe. Blair Electorate 78 16:54 Mr NEUMANN HVO Blair While many people are still doing it tough, wages are growing, inflation is falling and more than a million jobs have been created under the Albanese government, which is a record for a parliamentary term. I'm pleased to report that Labor is backing in jobs in my electorate of Blair as well, with around 14,600 new jobs created since the last election—an increase of nearly eight per cent. This is a tribute to local workers and employers and the government's responsible economic management, but it's also off the back of a number of major developments in the Ipswich region. One of these is the $400 million, carbon neutral Suntory drinks manufacturing facility at Swanbank, which generated around 450 jobs during construction and will provide 160 full-time ongoing jobs upon completion. In September I was fortunate enough to take a tour of the facility as they celebrated the start of production in a minor way—they're gearing up. I met Steph, from Mount Crosby in my electorate, who works in the lab and was very excited about her new job. On top of that, in August French beauty and cosmetic giant L'Oreal opened a $40 million distribution centre in neighbouring Redbank—in your electorate, Mr Speaker. It will employ 70 workers by the end of the year. That follows a number of major employers establishing themselves in Redbank, including an Australia Post mail distribution centre, a Coles distribution centre and Rheinmetall's Military Vehicle Centre of Excellence. In this year's budget we provided $15.3 million over seven years to support the production and export of more than a hundred Boxer heavy weapons carrier vehicles to Germany, as part of a $3 billion contract. This is the biggest defence export agreement in Australia's history, supporting 600 direct local jobs and hundreds of indirect jobs in the supply chain, and involving 300 local companies. On top of that, JBS has put hundreds of new workers in jobs and another shift on its Dinmore meat processing plant in response to increased demand for Australian beef. There are about 2,000 people working there at Dinmore. This is one of the biggest employers in the region, and it's very good that the Albanese government was able to have the China ban on JBS exports lifted last year, along with the ban on Kilcoy Global Foods, another major abattoir in my electorate, which provides just under 1,900 jobs. It's such an important employer in the upper Somerset region. While it's just outside my electorate, the $400 million Lockyer Valley Foods cannery and food processing facility planned for Withcott in the Lockyer Valley food bowl, just up the road from Ipswich, is very likely to employ many people from my electorate. I had the privilege of representing the Lockyer Valley in this chamber some years ago. This very exciting Lockyer Valley project will create more than 120 new jobs initially, increasing to more than 500 jobs over time. It will be a major boost for jobs in Toowoomba, the Lockyer Valley and Ipswich. What these major investments show is that business have confidence not just in the Australian economy but in the Ipswich and West Moreton region as well, as we boost supply chain resilience and provide opportunities for locals to work where they live. With so many new jobs being created and more and more people moving to the Ipswich region for work and lifestyle, we need to be able to house them all. There are now 260,000 people living in Ipswich, so our $32 billion Homes for Australia Plan includes a significant increase in funding and support for my home state and for my electorate of Blair. In the Ipswich region, the Albanese government's expanded Home Guarantee Scheme will help more than 3,550 homebuyers in Ipswich to buy their own home, and has done so already. One of the highest rates of take-up across the country is in my electorate, and this will help free up rental stock. What we really need is the Greens and the coalition to stop blocking our Help to Buy legislation so we can give more working families in my community the chance to realise the great Australian dream of homeownership. We've allocated a further $199.2 million to help the Queensland government enable infrastructure like roads, sewerage and water, to boost the supply of new homes in growth corridors, like Springfield and Ripley in Ipswich, and provided almost $400 million to fast-track the construction of more social housing rentals through the Social Housing Accelerator program, including projects in Ipswich and the Somerset region. We're seeing 1,300 dwellings supported in the first round of the HAFF. I expect that many of these will be built in Blair, and that's good for my electorate. House adjourned at 17:00 NOTICES 79 NOTICES Presentation 79

Thursday, 21 November 2024

The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Ms Payne ) took the chair at 09:31.

 

CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS 80 CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS Curtin Electorate: Energy 80 09:34 Ms CHANEY 300006 Curtin As we enter a likely long, hot summer, how can Australians stay cool and keep home temperatures and energy bills as low as possible? Australian rooftop solar is the cheapest home energy in the world. With solar panels, a battery, electric appliances and an electric car, a home can run on $560 a year, a tenth of the cost of having gas appliances, a petrol car and no solar—a tenth! But how do you get there? A group of Curtin volunteers worked for 12 months to generate a detailed report called Curtin's pathway to net zero. One community-driven project that evolved out of Curtin net zero was a comprehensive website that helps households electrify efficiently. Check it out at electrifycurtin.com.au. However, a community website is not enough for the massive task ahead. Government support is needed to speed up electrification and to make it available for everyone. The good news is that there are low-interest loans supported by the government for this purpose. In May 2023, the government announced a billion-dollar allocation for a new household energy upgrades fund to help Australians efficiently electrify their homes. The bad news is that these loans are a well-kept secret. Only a third of the funding has been allocated. We need other ways to use the allocated funding for better access and equity. This fund needs a much more effective public campaign so that Australians know how to access it. It's been allocated to Plenti and Westpac, and soon ING, to offer discounted rate loans of up to $50,000 to home or investment property owners to make energy-efficient upgrades such as rooftop solar, home battery, EV charging or hot water heat pumps. We've added some information about accessing this on our Electrify Curtin website for constituents who own property, but only $300 million of the billion dollars has been allocated through these providers so far. We need to do this now so Australians and the climate can reap the benefits. For the remaining $700,000, the fund needs a shake-up for access and equity. It shouldn't just be for those lucky enough to have a home loan with the right bank. The remaining funds should be deployed through a broader range of channels and structures. The government should consider zero-interest loans, or deferred loans repayable when your house is sold, or access through other channels like state government agencies, local governments or larger installers. Where the cost of living or rising temperatures are the top of mind, now is the time for faster and fairer electrification. The government has a great opportunity to rejig the Household Energy Upgrades Fund to ensure better access and equity. Sydney Electorate: Aviation Industry 81 09:37 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney I last spoke in this chamber on 27 June this year about a very serious issue in my electorate on Lord Howe Island. I spoke about the potential loss of their air service. The people of Lord Howe Island depend on Qantas, their only carrier, to access the mainland for education and health care, and for its main industry, tourism, to continue. Qantas are retiring their smaller turboprop aircraft, which, of course, was a real worry for the people of Lord Howe Island. The good news for the residents of Lord Howe Island and the 16,000 visitors who travel there every year is that the flights between Sydney and Lord Howe Island will continue as a partnership between Qantas and regional airline Skytrans. The national carrier will retire its Q200 aircraft, which currently operates the route, and Skytrans will take over that licence and run the route exclusively from 26 February 2026. Skytrans is an Australian based passenger airline that has been serving the cape Torres Strait region for more than 30 years. It has extensive experience providing air service to remote communities and islands. Qantas and Skytrans are finalising a code share agreement that will commence when Skytrans starts operating those flights.   That will mean that both Lord Howe Island locals and tourists will be able to continue to book their flights to and from Lord Howe Island through Qantas. The Lord Howe Island Skytrans flights will continue to operate on the same schedule and frequency as QantasLink's operations have done to date, and Skytrans intends to operate these from the Qantas terminal 3 in Sydney airport, so there will be no impact to existing bookings. QantasLink CEO Rachel Yangoyan has committed to maintaining services to the island. I very much welcome that commitment, and I will be watching it very closely. Skytrans has been awarded the licence to operate the regulated route until March 2030. The transition timeline means that until 29 March 2025 QantasLink will continue to operate its existing flights under its current licence. In a transitional period between 30 March 2025 and 25 February 2026, QantasLink will operate existing flights, sharing the regulated route with Skytrans. Skytrans pilots and crew might be doing training doing that transition period. From 26 February 2026 to March 2030, Skytrans will operate all the flights under its exclusive licence. Wannon Electorate: Roads 81 09:41 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon The Eurambeen-Streatham Road/Glenelg Highway intersection has seen, sadly, accidents occurring on a regular basis. Sadly, we've seen deaths occur, and we've seen dozens of accidents where there have been serious injuries. When we were in government, we allocated $2½ million to fix this intersection. We've given that money to the state government. The state government has committed to fixing the intersection. They're going to put additional lights in place and a roundabout. But the sad thing is that, like we've seen with a lot of projects right across Victoria, even though the planning has been done, action has stalled on fixing this very dangerous intersection. I call on the state government to get to work on this project. If they don't, the sad reality is that we're likely to see more accidents occurring. I went and saw the infrastructure minister yesterday to raise this issue with her as to what is happening with this intersection. Her office has given me a commitment to report back as to why it seems that this project has stalled. We have seen something occur. In one passage into that intersection, we now have some orange flashing lights. They were put there some time ago. We are also seeing that, in some areas around where the roundabout would go, there has been some sort of planning. But, once again, all this seems to have come to a halt. I'm hopeful that the Victorian state government will see it as a priority to now make sure that the work on this intersection takes place and takes place immediately. The last thing my constituents want to see is the state government focusing entirely on the big build in Melbourne at the expense of our roads. Sadly, with a 95 per cent cut in the maintenance budget by the state government and a near half cutting by the Albanese Labor government in road maintenance, we're seeing that, but we cannot see major upgrades to an intersection like this, where we've seen dozens of accidents and fatalities, be held up again by the state government. Greek Orthodox Church, Australian Chinese Community Association of New South Wales 82 09:44 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith It was my honour to welcome His All-Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew to Sydney last month on behalf of the Australian government. His All-Holiness is the patriarch of the Greek Orthodox Church throughout the world. As the spiritual leader of Orthodox Christians, he has become one of the most revered religious figures of our time. The visit coincided with the 100th anniversary of the establishment of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia. The church has helped preserve the culture, language and traditions of Australia's Greek community, connecting more than 400,000 people to their heritage. Thousands of Greek Australians turned out in our community to celebrate this special anniversary, and I was fortunate to join hundreds at St Andrew's Greek Orthodox church in Redfern for a mass presided over by His All Holiness, and the Prime Minister and the Governor of New South Wales were in attendance as well. I'm proud to represent Kingsford Smith. It has a thriving Greek community, and they were involved in those celebrations. We were deeply honoured by the presence of His All-Holiness during that special time. I want to pay tribute to him for his spiritual guidance to so many in our community. He has worked for the peaceful coexistence of all people. As we reflect with thanks on the past 100 years of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia, we have so much reason to be hopeful for the next 100 years as well. Earlier this month I was delighted to join celebrations for the 50th anniversary of the Australian Chinese Community Association of NSW, in Sydney. It's an incredible journey that the association has taken since it was founded, in 1974, by a group of dedicated volunteers. Since that time it's been a vital part of our community, helping new migrants settle into Australian life. What started as a small service has grown into a broad organisation that provides essential support to so many. Today the Australian Chinese community association employs over 350 staff, who assist around 1,100 clients each week. It celebrates Chinese heritage through language classes, festivals and cultural events, as well as building connected communities through various services, including aged-care and disability services. In our community of people with a Chinese background, they have helped so many with disabilities, allowing them to live independent and fulfilling lives. I'm very proud that in Kingsford Smith we've got over 23,000 locals with Chinese heritage. In our community, Mandarin is the most spoken language, after English, and Cantonese is the third most spoken language. I want to pay tribute to Christine Mok, the president of the Australian Chinese association, and good friends Ted Tseng and Shirley Chan—Shirley was a previous president—for the hard work they do in our community. Congratulations to the Australian Chinese Community Association of NSW on your 50th anniversary. Forde Electorate: School Awards 82 09:47 Mr VAN MANEN 188315 Forde All of us in this place, I'm sure, have the privilege at this time of year of attending a number of school graduations, and over the past couple of weeks I've had that privilege, attending some of the graduation ceremonies and award ceremonies in my electorate, particularly for our high-school students. These ceremonies are momentous occasions where the students get to reflect, and they have a sense of anticipation for what comes next but also a sense of celebration for finishing 13 years of schooling. To all of the school leavers and graduates across the electorate of Forde, congratulations on reaching this incredible milestone in your educational journey. One of the great things we get to do at some of these awards nights is recognise terrific students right across the schools. I'd like to congratulate some of these students that had the privilege of winning the various awards I sponsor across a variety of my local schools: Orlando Chen from Beenleigh State High School, Oliver Neil from Calvary Christian College, Vinya Eda from Chisholm Catholic College, Madeline Delaney from Coomera Anglican College and Yvette Aspden from Loganlea State High School. Over at Marsden State High School—the largest school in Queensland, with more than 4,000 enrolled students—I presented two awards: one to a grade 9 student, Carine Makiriro, and one to a year 12 student, Caleb Breitkreutz. The Parklands Christian College award went to Gabriella Neil, and Park Ridge State High School's award went to Jacob Brindle. All of these students are a tremendous testament to their communities and the wonderful work they do. At Rivermount College, Alex Burd won the award. And there were awards to Joseph Webster at Shailer Park State High School, Jaryn Oliphant at St Stephen's College, Bodhi Sheppard at Windaroo Valley State High School and Ebony Nielson and Kieran Epiha at Upper Coomera State College. Also, we have the primary awards coming up over the next few weeks. I'll congratulate all of those award winners in advance, but I won't name them at this point in time because that would spoil the surprise. I also take the opportunity to thank all of the teachers, administrators and staff of the schools for the terrific job they do each and every year to make our schools such a wonderful place for our students to attend. Congratulations to all of the parents as well for your support to your students to get them where they've got to today. Thank you for your efforts. Completing high school education would not be possible without the terrific team of supporters you have in your parents, your families and all of your teachers. Well done to everybody. Congratulations, and all the best for your future journey. Jagajaga Electorate: Community Events 83 09:50 Ms THWAITES 282212 Jagajaga It was a real pleasure to be at Malahang Festival in Heidelberg West on the weekend. This is an much-loved and anticipated highlight on the calendar for everyone in the 3081 community and the surrounding communities. It really is a true celebration of our local community, featuring a culturally diverse program and nearly 30 stalls from groups right across Banyule showcasing the work of many incredible community groups. I really enjoyed doing things like checking out the Banyule scouts' impressive climbing frame that they'd made, and certainly my daughter enjoyed trying that four times over, I think; exploring the colouring activities at the Barrbunin Beek Aboriginal Gathering Place stall; and of course supporting the important work of our 3081 Angels, who do such important work donating preloved baby and children's furniture and clothing to families in our area who need it. While there, I also caught up with the Lifeblood Team, and they are issuing an urgent call for blood donations this summer. There are more than 1,600 appointments that need to be filled before the new year period to maintain the blood supply, and of course this is a critical time for that blood supply. Locally in our community, the Bundoora Donor Centre is open, including on public holidays, and the Eltham pop-up centre will be available from 7 to 17 January. I am urging locals, if you do have time, please contact those centres and donate. I do want to acknowledge the staff and organisers of the Malahang Festival at Banyule City Council for ensuring that the festival is a great success this year and every year. I also give a shout-out to my amazing volunteers who manned my community store during the day and made sure that we had some great conversations with locals. Thank you. I would like to highlight two fantastic organisations in my electorate that help older Australians age well and stay actively involved in our community. I've always really valued the important role that U3As play in fostering personal connections, lifelong learning and engagement in the older Australian community, so I was pleased to visit with Banyule U3A a couple of weeks ago and catch up with a number of the members there. Banyule U3A was founded in 1986 with an initial membership of just 59 people. It is in fact one of the oldest U3As in Victoria. Today it has more than 900 members, making it the largest seniors group in the City of Banyule. A big thank you to Sue and her team for welcoming me, and I look forward to seeing you all again soon. Congratulations to the Eltham Men's Shed who celebrated their 10th anniversary in August, and I acknowledge the incredible contribution this group makes to our community. It was a pleasure to celebrate their milestone. I give my heartfelt thanks to Leon and the hardworking committee members for all their dedication. I look forward to continuing to work with you. Thank you. Labor Government 83 09:53 Mr THOMPSON 281826 Herbert All Australians should be asking themselves these questions to really test the government and to make sure that the promises that were made before the last election have been fulfilled: Am I better off today than I was before the last election? Am I in a better position now than I was before the last election? Have my power prices gone down? Has my mortgage lowered? Can I afford rent, groceries and petrol? Can I afford insurance? Do I feel safer? The reality is that the answer to all of these questions is no. Your power prices have skyrocketed. The promise of $275 this year and every other year was a lie. Your mortgages have gone up. We've seen criminals released into the street. Petrol prices are at record highs and people can't afford to get insurance. The No. 1 role of a government is to keep you safe. The second is to tackle the cost-of-living crisis. This has not occurred under the Albanese Labor government, because their first point of business was to call a referendum—to spend $400 million and go to the polls. Instead of tackling the crippling cost-of-living crisis, they decided to bring a divisive referendum to the people, even though they were told it would fail. We've seen people's lives made worse, not better. My office in Townsville, in a regional part of Australia, is feeling the pinch of the lack of action and lack of policies that have been brought forward by this Labor government. If it's bad policy that hurts the cities, times it by 20 and that's what it feels like in the regions. The cost-of-living crisis that we face is something that every single person in Townsville is feeling right now. Then, during the debacle of this term of government, we saw the Australian Defence Force be let down time and time again. We saw sonar used on divers, where they were injured, and the Prime Minister was too weak to call out the bad behaviour and raise it with Xi Jinping. We saw flares fired at an Australian military helicopter, risking the lives of those on board, and, once again, no minister nor the Prime Minister stood up for our people. Now we have the misinformation bill, which will allow a single minister to be an arbiter of the truth. We stand against this and we'll fight for you. Calwell Electorate: Broadmeadows Suburban University Study Hub 84 09:56 Ms VAMVAKINOU 00AMT Calwell Last week, the minister for education announced the sites for the government's suburban university study hubs. The hubs are a great way for people to access and study a wide range of tertiary courses across Australia without having to leave their communities. It's fantastic news that one of the sites will be in Broadmeadows, in my electorate of Calwell, which will form part of La Trobe University's northern suburbs study hub. Our local students, especially from disadvantaged communities, who live greater distances away from major university campuses will now have the opportunity to participate and succeed in higher education. The bid for Broadmeadows, involving extensive community consultation led by La Trobe University in collaboration with our local Kangan TAFE, Hume City Council and other local partners, committed to addressing the need for dedicated study facilities and wrap-around support in Melbourne's north. La Trobe University's vice-chancellor, Professor Theo Farrell, said: If we are to succeed in doubling higher education participation and attainment by 2050, as outlined in the Universities Accord, we would require both a significant effort and a generational change. The northern suburbs study hub will be important to help achieve that goal. By providing access to resources beyond ordinary business hours and fostering an environment of academic support, our ambition is for the hub to play a crucial role in building readiness and aspiration for tertiary-level study and to help meet critical skill needs in the areas The Broadmeadows hub will be located on the ground floor of the Hume City Council building. It's close to public transport, located just minutes away from the Broadmeadows train station, with bus connectivity, and sits within the major council services and shopping precinct. Figures from the 2021 census on LGA boundaries show that in the city of Hume, the attainment rates for bachelor or higher degrees sit at about 33.2 per cent for 25- to 34-year-olds and only 22.2 per cent for 15- to 64-year-olds. A division having been called in the House of Representatives— Sitting suspended from 09 : 58 to 10 : 10 Ms VAMVAKINOU 00AMT Our community has much lower tertiary education participation, and we need to make every effort to improve this. Evidence shows that where there are university study hubs university participation goes up. As Melbourne's outer north is forecast to grow by an additional 102,000 homes by 2050, and that's about 318,850 people, better access to higher education will be vital to ensuring that our students have access to and that universities can better provide educational opportunities that meet the skills and training needs. I want to thank Minister Jason Clare for his passion for education. His commitment to everyone getting a fair go regardless of post code will see my community benefit from the opportunities that will now be afforded to them. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 282237 In accordance with standing order 193, the time for members' constituency statements has concluded. BILLS 84 BILLS Customs Amendment (ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Area Second Protocol Implementation and Other Measures) Bill 2024 84

Customs Amendment (ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Area Second Protocol Implementation and Other Measures) Bill 2024

Second Reading 84 10:12 Mr STEVENS 176304 Sturt I'm thrilled to speak on the Customs Amendment (ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Area Second Protocol Implementation and Other Measures) Bill 2024. I'm disappointed that I seem to be the only speaker, because I think this bill is on one of the extremely important issues that we should all be seeking an opportunity to discuss in this chamber—and that is expanding the economic opportunity that free trade provides. Free trade is under siege in some parts of the world at the moment. Quite concerningly, some parts of the world are looking to engage in an increase of protectionism. Thankfully, in this country, we have a very important political consensus between our major parties that free trade is a good thing. As a nation with a very healthy, and proudly healthy, trade surplus, we know that we are a wealthier country because of trade than we would be without trade. Indeed, when you look at just agriculture as an example, there are a little over 27 million people living in this country and the often quoted figure, which I'm quite sure is accurate, is that we produce enough food in this country to feed 70 million people. That means we feed 27 million Australians and 43 million other people around the world. That's good for those people that need the food but also good for our primary producers, who are able to produce more than what could be consumed just in this nation and make wealth from selling overseas. Whether it's the mining sector, the manufacturing sector or the services sector, we know that the wealth of this country is underpinned by that trade. If you think about our largest export, it's iron ore. The amount of iron ore that we use in this country to transform into steel in my home state in Whyalla for longform products and in Wollongong, the other major steel plant for sheet steel, meets the needs of this country and we have spectacular quantities of iron ore which are exported in equally spectacular quantities around the world for the steelmaking needs of other nations. It earns tens of billions of dollars, sometimes more than hundreds of billions of dollars, for our economy. And so many other natural resources that we are happily endowed with make such an enormous difference to the wealth and the standards of living of everyone in this country. I applaud the fact that we haven't lost our way and haven't gone down the path of populist rhetoric around tariffs and restricting the flow of goods and services across our border, because we are so much wealthier because of that. This bill deals with continued harmonisation opportunities with our relationship and trade agreements between ASEAN, Australia and New Zealand. I have had a regularly occurring terrible experience in my life with disgraceful nontariff barriers that certain jurisdictions try to use to obfuscate trade. In my time in the wool industry, we would always have these tactics, particularly from the European Union, to make it as difficult as possible. I happened to be in wool, but anyone in agriculture knows some of the appalling practices that the EU has engaged in over time to frustrate the ability of good-quality Australian produce getting into markets like the EU. I once had to get a government sanctioned vet to provide a health certificate for a one-kilogram spindle of yarn because there was this suggestion that it couldn't be sent into the EU unless a vet had inspected a piece of yarn—that had been superwashed, I might add. Superwashing is a hydrochloric acid treatment of wool fibre before it is combed and spun and dyed. The suggestion that that needed to have a health certificate from a vet to make sure that it wasn't carrying some kind of potential biologically risky disease was absolutely ludicrous. But these tactics have, of course, been used many, many times to frustrate our fair and free market access that we should be entitled to through agreements. I never had any issues with the excellent relationship that we have with the ASEAN and New Zealand nations. The three parties that we are discussing in this legislation are probably excellent examples of people that have some of the highest standards of good-quality trade liberalised practices and welcome the opportunity for the competition that that provides. I appreciate the opportunity to make some brief comments on this bill. I commend the bipartisanship that we have with the government when it comes to looking for every opportunity possible to continue to enter into signed agreements to provide better and more open access for good-quality Australian goods and services to export markets, and I welcome the competition that flows from that from the nations we sign these agreements with. I'm not aware of any example of Australia not being a very open and willing partner to negotiate with any other jurisdictions that want to talk about that sensible reduction in trade barriers between our economy and theirs. There are lots more opportunities to undertake into the future. The sad state of the multilateral World Trade Organization process of further trade liberalisation is very disappointing. It is not the fault in any way, shape or form of this country. We've always been a very willing participant in those trade negotiation rounds, but, disappointingly, and particularly because of the way in which you have to achieve agreement through the WTA process, we, of course, haven't seen any meaningful progress, really, since the Uruguay rounds that saw the 1994 agreements and the 1995 establishment of the World Trade Organization. I know that the bipartisanship in this chamber, by and large, will always see us being a very open, keen and willing partner to multilateral avenues, but this is a good example where we won't sit back and wait for the WTO processes to continue to grind at a glacial pace seemingly towards nowhere. We will always engage in bilateral agreements with willing parties, so I commend this bill to the House, which sees us further streamline and harmonise the way in which we undertake the specifics of trade documentation and trade bureaucracy between ASEAN, Australia and New Zealand. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Ordered that this bill be reported to the House without amendment. Navigation Amendment Bill 2024 86

Navigation Amendment Bill 2024

Second Reading 86 10:20 Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR Ballarat In summing up on this bill, the Navigation Amendment Bill 2024, I thank the opposition for indicating their support for it. The bill seeks to ensure Australia continues to implement our obligations under the International Convention for Safety of Life at Sea 1974, the SOLAS, including by meeting the relevant international standards on seafarer safety. The bill reflects amendments to the SOLAS convention to provide standards for the safety of industrial personnel. Industrial personnel are those persons transported or accommodated on board a vessel for the purpose of offshore industrial activities performed on board other ships or offshore facilities. The carriage of industrial personnel differs to that of other passengers, as the vessels used are primarily offshore support vessels, and the transfer of industrial personnel often occurs in challenging environments. This requires specialist skills and control measures not required in usual passenger operations. These amendments recognise and support the uniqueness of the offshore sector and the importance of protecting the lives and health of those involved in these activities, as we look to the future possibilities of the maritime, offshore and energy sectors. I commend the bill to the House. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Ordered that this bill be reported to the House without amendment. ADJOURNMENT 86 ADJOURNMENT Bonner Electorate: Bayside Community Awards, Industrial Relations 86 10:22 Mr VASTA E0D Bonner Some years ago, I started and ran a small Italian restaurant in Carina called Ellios. While it was a labour of love, I understand the frustration, anxiety and instability of managing a small business. Not only satisfying customers but tracking finances, understanding the law and taking care of employees is no easy task. While it's easy for some politicians to welcome rising costs when someone else is paying for it, we actually need to support entrepreneurs and innovators to increase competition and drive down costs. Small to medium enterprises make up 98 per cent of all Australian business, employing 70 per cent of the workforce and creating $500 billion in economic activity. Given they generate one-third of our GDP, we can't deny the substantial economic contributions of many mums, dads, students and other self-starters who are brave enough to leap into business. I was recently able to support the Best Small Business Newcomer award at the Bayside Community Awards. These awards are a celebration of great businesses, organisations and individuals delivering excellence in customer service in the Bayside community of Brisbane. With 380 people in attendance at the Wynnum Manly Leagues Club, I want to thank the Bayside Community Fund team for their efforts in bringing the event to life. Although I was in Canberra on the night, the range and quality of nominations across all categories was unreal. Congratulations to all those nominated, especially to the Tasty Pocket on securing the win. Earlier this year, Eliza and Justin took their Greek fusion food truck to the next level, and opened a restaurant right near my office. Only a coalition government will fight for people like Justin and Eliza, who are running a successful enterprise, contributing to our national economy and our local community. We've always been the party of less red tape and simpler, fairer taxes. While insolvencies are at record highs, with more than 11,000 companies faltering in the last financial year, I urge owners and customers alike to ask: who is going to remove the complexity and hostility of Labor's industrial relations agenda, which is putting unreasonable burdens on businesses? We need a coalition government with a plan to rein in inflationary spending, a plan to extend the value of the instant asset write-off to $30,000 and a plan to remove red tape by restoring the pre-existing definition of a 'casual worker'. That's right—we will bring certainty to our small businesses with policies that promote productivity and innovation. Climate Change 86 10:25 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah Australia's abundant natural resources provide an untapped opportunity to establish ourselves as leaders in the clean energy sector. But Australia is failing to rise to these opportunities, as we now sit at 52nd on the world's global Climate Change Performance Index, amongst the low-performing countries of the world. This is because this government's payment of fossil fuel subsidies continues and there is a continued approval of coal and gas projects. Not only have we dropped on the index but Australia has been graded 'low' in the index category of 'renewable energy' as the government continues to expand exploration and extraction of gas, putting fuel on global warming. You cannot claim a gold star for saying you're going to act on climate change and then continue extracting and expanding coal and gas mining. First Nations engagement in climate transition is what we can look to for great opportunities. We know that the transition to renewable energy presents an opportunity to empower our local communities to benefit from the immense opportunities that climate transition presents. First Nations communities have resource-rich lands and deep knowledge of country and culture. We know that Indigenous led projects bring enormous opportunities to our regional and rural communities by driving improved health and wellbeing outcomes, providing much-needed investment in critical infrastructure and creating sustainable employment opportunities. But there are significant barriers that remain. Access to capital is a major challenge. Many Indigenous communities, despite being asset rich, are cash poor due to over 200 years of systemic economic disempowerment. Without the necessary financial resources to begin project development, these communities are often excluded from meaningful participation in renewable energy industry and projects. While the government has expressed public support for harnessing this opportunity for traditional owners, words alone are insufficient and ultimately empty. What is needed is consistent, meaningful action to break down barriers, provide access to resources and ensure that Indigenous communities can lead and thrive in the transition. What does this mean? The Aboriginal Clean Energy Partnership brings together the MG Corporation, Balanggarra Aboriginal Corporation, Kimberley Land Council and Pollination in a groundbreaking collaboration. Together, they are pioneering a transformative approach to enhancing the self-determination and economic empowerment of Australia's traditional owners, particularly through the East Kimberley Clean Energy Project. This partnership represents an Australia-first model: a First Nations owned and led initiative focused on developing a commercial-scale green hydrogen and ammonia project in Western Australia. Where are the headlines? Why isn't the government absolutely knocking down the door to support this kind of project? This partnership represents such a first. It is a landmark project in several ways, being the first 100 per cent green hydrogen and ammonia export venture in Australia and the first energy development to actively engage traditional owner groups as stakeholders in the project on their land. This project highlights the immense value and impact of First Nations majority owned partnerships. By implementing a co-design and co-creation approach, it showcases how clean energy projects on country can deliver significant benefits not just for Indigenous communities but for the entire nation. Each stakeholder holds an equal 25 per cent stake in the project, contributing complementary skills and strategic resources to its success. This initiative is more than a clean energy project. It's a pathway for First Nations people to generate capital, improve living standards and reinvest in further renewable energy opportunities. By empowering Indigenous communities as leaders in the energy transition, this project plays a pivotal and vital role in Australia's shift from fossil fuels to sustainable clean energy solutions by empowering First Nations communities. For far too long, Indigenous Australians have been excluded from meaningful equity in traditional energy generation. This is a reality that must change, and a project like this is where you can start. While the Aboriginal Clean Energy Partnership has set a commendable example by actively engaging traditional owners, this approach must become the standard, not the exception. (Time expired) Tasmania: Albanese Government 87 10:30 Mr BRIAN MITCHELL 129164 Lyons The Albanese Labor government continues to deliver in the regions. Last Saturday, the Minister for Education announced that Sorell, in my electorate, will be home to one of 10 suburban university study hubs across the country. Study hubs provide student support and campus-style facilities for students in a university or TAFE course, without them having to leave their community. That's a big win for the future students of Sorell. Congratulations to Business and Employment Southeast Tasmania Inc, known as BEST, for its successful application. Next week, the doors will open to Tasmania's fifth urgent-care clinic in Bridgewater, joining two in Hobart: one in Launceston in your own electorate of Bass, Deputy Speaker, and one in Devonport. I strongly made the case for the people of Bridgewater to have an alternative option to driving into the city for non-emergency medical care. That will also benefit the areas of Brighton, the Derwent Valley and Hobart's northern suburbs. It brings bulk-billed non-emergency care closer to home, taking the pressure off Royal Hobart Hospital's emergency department. It's a huge win for the area, and I'm proud to see it inching closer to reality. Next month, we open a new Services Australia centre in Sorell—a $3 million, fully staffed facility that will save people a trip to Hobart or the eastern shore. Our Labor government is also doubling roads funding for councils, with more than $57 million heading to Lyons. The Albanese Labor government's Australian General Practice Training Program, being delivered in partnership with the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners, is training regional GPs in St Helens and Swansea. We are ensuring the sustainability of regional childcare facilities, with recent funding to support the families of Bicheno, Triabunna, Campbell Town, Bagdad, Evandale and Longford, with more than half a million dollars of support. We're funding aged-care upgrades in Deloraine and Swansea, supporting the right of all older people in regional Tasmania to have access to safe, high-quality aged-care services, regardless of where they live. Schools in Triabunna and New Norfolk are benefiting from the Schools Upgrade Fund to help build or upgrade infrastructure. We are supporting farmers with water projects across the state. Just last week, the Prime Minister visited Tasmania to announce that he's providing $150 million for the Greater South East Irrigation Scheme to ensure that farmers in the south-east—one of the drier areas in Tasmania—get the water they need. It's not an election commitment—it's not waiting until after the election—it's funded now. It's happening. That's in addition to $270 million for Tasmanian water infrastructure projects already committed by this government, providing highly reliable water to expand irrigation districts and supporting regional economic development, including the Northern Midlands Irrigation Scheme; the Sassafras Wesley Vale Irrigation Scheme augmentation; and the Don Irrigation Scheme, which was officially opened last year. We're supporting funding for regional infrastructure, like the $1.5 million for the Bicheno Gulch Foreshore and Esplanade Upgrade; $4.4 million for the Longford Memorial Hall and Village Green revitalisation; $500,000 for Prospect Park upgrades to enable Launceston City Football Club to grow; $500,000 for the St Helens RSL redevelopment; $5 million for the Launceston Airport check-in hall and security expansion; $15 million for the Royal Flying Doctor Service upgrade at Launceston Airport; and $3.7 million for Perth Early Learning Centre upgrades. The Liberals and the Nationals claim to be the only parties to support the regions, but this just demonstrates how false that is. After spending five of my eight years in this place in opposition, I have seen firsthand how Tasmania was kept off the map. The Liberals and the Nationals always seem to forget that cashiers, teachers, childcare workers, police, aged-care workers, shop attendants, butchers, road workers and office workers all live in the regions too. Labor's bigger tax cuts for ordinary workers, our cheaper medicines, the higher wages that we are backing in and the record jobs growth all support regional workers and regional communities. Over the past three years, the Labor government has made a huge impact in Lyons, and it's in my constituents' best interests that Lyons and the nation are represented by Labor. Rebecca White is Labor's candidate for Lyons at the next federal election, and I look forward to her being elected as part of a re-elected Australian Labor government so that Labor can get on with the job of rebuilding our regions. Hughes Electorate: Infrastructure 88 10:35 Ms WARE 300123 Hughes Since being elected in May 2022, it has been the greatest privilege of my life to represent and serve the electorate of Hughes, which is in the south-west and the western end of the Sutherland Shire. The Electoral Commissioner has now moved various suburbs into my electorate. These are Bardia, Glenfield, Ingleburn, Long Point, Macquarie Fields and Macquarie Links. I am proud that I will have the chance going into the next election to have the opportunity to serve these communities in this place. I want to work with the people of south-west Sydney to get south-west Sydney back on track. South-west Sydney is positioned to be an immense growth area over the next two decades. It's got projects and initiatives like the Western Sydney International Airport, which is set to open 24/7 in 2026. The south-west will have the new city of Bradfield, which will be located in the local government area of Liverpool. But, since May 2022, the Albanese Labor government has comprehensively failed to deliver for the communities in south-west Sydney, particularly for those in the Liverpool local government area and the Campbelltown local government area. For example, the Western Sydney airport is a brand-new airport in the most populous city and the most populous state in our nation. However, the federal government has failed to deliver the infrastructure for such a crucial project. To be clear, the coalition, when in government, had set up an infrastructure plan to enable rail links from the south-west into the airport and back. They had also propositioned that there would be road links going in there. While we're talking about a new city, I think the judgement of this Prime Minister is questionable, as he did not have a portfolio specifically linked to cities. Former coalition governments have usually always had a cities minister. To show that it's a very important part of the ministry, somebody in that ministry would have oversight of all of the cities and how they link within our nation, a very geographically large nation. This Prime Minister has instead made the decision to put it all in infrastructure. That means his only interest in the new Bradfield city, which is in south-west Sydney, is just in terms of what infrastructure it needs. Well, the infrastructure that it did need has been pulled by Infrastructure Minister King. Just this week, it was reported that she has pulled the funding for the Western Sydney airport link. The minister has claimed that the interchange between the M7 and M12, two major motorways in New South Wales, is something that the federal government is not party to. This is despite a $110 million commitment by the previous Liberal government. The Liberals recognise the importance of a new international airport. The Liberals recognise the importance to the south-west that this airport will bring. It brings an opportunity for much-needed employment into that area, for example. It also brings the opportunity for us to showcase the south-west to visitors and tourists coming into our country, but that is not something that this Labor government has prioritised. I'm not even sure if the infrastructure minister has been to south-west Sydney. Regrettably, the contempt this government clearly has for the people of Sydney's south-west does not stop here. Alongside the cut to vital infrastructure, an additional 50 projects will no longer receive a single cent in funding from the Albanese Labor government. As we're moving into a federal election, if the Liberals are elected, if the coalition is elected, we will fund south-west Sydney. We will, for example, connect Campbelltown back into Sydney. We will look at establishing the Campbelltown community and justice precinct. We will get south-west Sydney back on track. We'll get Australia back on track. (Time expired) Men's Health, Australian Export Awards 89 10:40 Ms MILLER-FROST 296272 Boothby Tuesday this week was International Men's Day. Here in Parliament House, the Speaker hosted the Movember Institute of Men's Health. While my background in women's health is perhaps well known, what is less well known is that I was also the policy lead for men's health when I worked in SA Health. In Australia, men's life expectancy is four years less than women's. Thirty-seven per cent of men die prematurely before they are 75 years of age. The leading causes of premature mortality in Australian men are, in descending order, cardiovascular disease—heart attacks and strokes; lung cancer; suicide, which is the leading cause of death amongst men aged 15 to 44; colorectal cancer; and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or COPD. Some of these conditions have lifestyle factors. Others are preventable or curable with early diagnosis and intervention. A lot of these conditions are avoidable or at least curable. There is also a demographic aspect to this. Men in regional and remote areas have poorer health statistics. Men in lower socioeconomic areas have poorer health statistics. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander men and men from culturally diverse backgrounds have poorer health statistics. Men from same-sex attracted and gender diverse communities have poorer health statistics. Additionally, there's a gender stereotype issue. Men report that they are expected to tough it out, not to seek help, and that the idea of having regular checkups and seeking help for symptoms, which is really important to maintaining health for anyone, is discouraged or socially unacceptable for them. Men also report gender stereotype issues when seeking help in the system. They say that clinicians don't respond to their needs, sometimes downplay their symptoms or advise them to tough it out. I would like to congratulate Movember for their excellent work in raising awareness and funds for men's health. Their report, The real face of men's health, is a sobering read. As they note, a gendered lens on health is not a competition; it's not an either/or proposition. Our health system needs to respond to the health needs of the entire population, and a gendered lens is simply another way of ensuring that the services we provide work for the entire community. I'd also like to talk about the Australian Exporter of the Year awards that were announced last night. Congratulations to South Australia's Rising Sun Pictures, which is the 2024 Australian Exporter of the Year and winner of the creative industries category in this year's Australian Export Awards. If you want to know what Rising Sun Pictures do, they were heavily involved in Lord of the Rings. They've been involved in the latest versions of Mad Max, Indiana Jones and a whole range of other well-known movies. It's very exciting for us. We're also very thrilled that Fivecast SA also won the advanced technologies category. Yesterday I met with Rob Bowden from MAXM Skate, one of the finalists. It's really worth talking about the fantastic medical device that they have created. This looks like a rollerskate that you would put on your foot. It has a sensor that goes up your leg. It's actually a rehabilitation tool or instrument for people who have experienced a total knee reconstruction. What they have found is that, by using this device as part of your rehabilitation to practice stretching out and pulling back with your knee being totally supported, it makes your rehabilitation much faster. They are now exporting around the world. They have been through the TGA process in Australia, but they are also exporting to Europe and Asia and are looking at the United Arab Emirates and America. It is a fantastic rehabilitation tool that enables people to get out of hospital quicker, which saves costs for the system and the person, but they also get a better rehabilitation outcome out of that. Congratulations to MAXM Skate. I think you are a worthy finalist. Unfortunately, you were knocked out by Rising Sun Pictures on this occasion, but it is such a fantastic thing that is coming out of South Australia and the Flinders University research institute at Tonsley. Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024 90

Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024

10:45 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher Today is a good day. It's not very often that you can say that in opposition, but today is a good day. Why is it a good day? It's because the government introduced a bill today which will change the lives of many young Australians and their families. This might sound strange coming from an opposition member, but this is something I've been very passionate about for many years. In 2018, I hadn't been in this place very long. Most of us would remember the day when young Dolly Everett took her life. Dolly Everett was a happy young teenager. I think she was a poster girl for R. M. Williams. The world was her oyster. She was the embodiment of a successful young teenage girl. But she was subjected to relentless bullying, and sadly, in 2018—sadly is not the word; there's no adjective that suitably describes what happened—she took her own life, tragically. As someone who has walked that mental health path as a dad, I was incredibly moved by her passing. I thought, 'What can I do about this?' I ended up convening a meeting with DIGI in Sydney. DIGI is a group of all of the major electronic platforms including Google, Meta—although, it wasn't Meta back then—and other social media platforms. We talked about what happened with Dolly and how we could put steps in place to try to ensure that Dolly would be the last. I think I will remember that meeting in Sydney for the rest of my life, because I walked out of it feeling so angry. I felt that I had just been transported back in time and that I had met with big tobacco in the 1960s and 1970s, because the responses that I was getting to my questions were: 'It's all good. We've got this under control. We're doing everything we can.' I walked out of that meeting feeling so angry that these people were either wilfully blind or being obstructionist. It was probably more that they were being obstructionist. So I started a campaign. I felt so aggrieved on behalf of Dolly's family and every family that is undergoing or has undergone the sort of relentless stress that has come about by the effects of social media on their young people. We know from English studies that, in fact, many parents sign up their kids to social media platforms before they even turn the required age of 13. That had to stop. That had to stop. I was incredibly pleased when the Leader of the Opposition took up this cudgel more than 12 months ago and announced that he would support in the first 100 days of a coalition government a trial for age verification for social media. We then came out in July of this year and said that, if we were elected, we would push and legislate for a minimum age of 16 for social media. Peter Dutton has led from the front on this. The bill, as I have had an opportunity to read, is not perfect, but I welcome it. The provision of a legislated duty of care will ensure that these platforms have nowhere to run, because there will be lawyers out there that will now, when this bill is passed, be able to sue on behalf of their clients. (Time expired) McGrath, Councillor Allan, Queanbeyan Medicare Urgent Care Clinic, Goulburn Mulwaree Award, Royal Australian Air Force: Thompson Family, O'Donovan, Mr Ned 90 10:50 Ms McBAIN 281988 Eden-Monaro I rise today to pay tribute to an Eden-Monaro local who has committed his life to serving his community. Yass Valley councillor Allan McGrath has been involved in local government for 50 years after first being elected to Queanbeyan City Council on 21 September 1974. Councillor McGrath has called Yass home since 1998 and been actively involved in the community through various organisation. He was well known as the face behind Kidz Blitz, a beloved local toy and gift shop in Yass which he ran for 11 years. He had a vision to foster a cleaner, greener and more prosperous Yass Valley. Councillor McGrath has just finished a term as mayor and is now serving his community again as a local councillor who, at the age of 82, has given so much and still has so much more to give. I would like to share with the chamber a truly transformative change that this government is having on health care in Queanbeyan. We have delivered the Queanbeyan Medicare Urgent Care Clinic, which is the single biggest improvement to health care in Queanbeyan since the introduction of Medicare. I hear from constituents every day about the benefits of this service, keeping families away from the hospital and taking pressure off the system. A local healthcare worker recently wrote to me saying: … as a health worker in Queanbeyan (at the Queanbeyan Hospital Pathology) and a medical scientist, opening the urgent care clinic here in Queanbeyan has made a massive impact with the emergency department and the turnaround time with patients and quicker triage. Labor is making tangible improvements in the lives of everyday Australians, for workers and their families. I am proud to be part of a government that is making these changes and will continue to advocate for the healthcare needs across all of Eden-Monaro. I would like to recognise the latest recipients of the Goulburn Mulwaree Award, two local photographers whose work has deeply enriched the community. Throughout their lives, Jim Webb and Darryl Fernance have captured thousands of moments in the Goulburn region. Until his recent retirement, Darryl worked for the Goulburn Post, capturing events ranging from helicopter accidents to community events like the 2019 Goulburn rodeo. Reflecting on his years of service, Darryl remarked: It's to record history. …   …   … Things should be recorded and shared. There's no good putting them away in a box. While Darryl documented local events, Jim's work has also played a crucial role in capturing the community's essence. Photography has been a lifelong passion for Jim, who has taken thousands of photos at community events, including the recent Lilac Festival, where he won the award. I would like to congratulate these men on their efforts and dedication to Goulburn Mulwaree. The award is well deserved, and I encourage everybody to check out their work via Facebook and the Goulburn Post, where their photographs tell the stories of the community. I want to pay credit to a family in my electorate that has provided a total of 85 years continuous full-time service to the Royal Australian Air Force. I recently had the pleasure of meeting Warrant Officer Cary Thompson, who told me about his incredible career with the Air Force, along with his wife, Sergeant Leanne Thompson, and his son, Squadron Leader Nathan Thompson. Throughout the family's career they have represented the ADF and the Australian government on international tasking, detachments and postings, including with DFAT at the Australian High Commission in Singapore and deployment command in the UK in support of new capability acquisition and introduction to ADF service. When Leanne transitions from full-time service at the end of this year, it will see a cumulative contribution of the family to multiple deployments, including to Iraq and the Middle East, domestic and regional deployments in support of humanitarian aid and disaster relief, including flood, tsunami, earthquake and fire devastations over four decades. Warrant Officer Cary, Sergeant Leanne and Squadron Leader Nathan Thompson have contributed to the security and advancement of Australia's interests through their dedicated commitment to the ADF for 85 years and continue to contribute through active reservist employment since transferring from permanent service. Thank you for your incredible service to our community and to our country. We are so proud to have you as part of the mighty Eden-Monaro. Today I want to acknowledge my sincere condolences to the O'Donovan family, following the passing of Ned O'Donovan from Tura Beach. Beloved husband of Barbara, dad to Michelle and Rebecca and pop to Karenza, Zane and Sienna. His daughter Rebecca described Ned as an 'absolute legend'. A memorial for Ned is being held in my electorate right now. I send my condolences to his family and to the broader Bega Valley. He worked at the Bega Valley Shire for nearly three decades in various roles, but was the Merimbula town team leader and known affectionately as the 'Mayor of Merimbula'. He had a cheeky grin. He was always up for mischief. He loved a punt. Ned, you will be sorely missed in our community. Vale, Ned O'Donovan. Question agreed to. Federation Chamber adjourned at 10:56