2024-11-28 2 1 0 House of Reps 0 1

Thursday, 28 November 2024

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

BUSINESS 1 BUSINESS Days and Hours of Meeting 1 09:01 Mr BURKE DYW Watson on indulgence—I'll give people some advice as to the likely arrangements for today. Obviously the Senate, or the other place, has not yet made a decision as to the timing of when they might be voting on different legislation and, therefore, when anything that requires amendment will be sent back to us for further decision. I just want to give members the outline of how the government intends to handle it if messages continue to come from the Senate late in the day. The intention is that we would keep the House running until probably about 6 pm if messages are still coming. If no messages are coming, we will probably only go until 5 pm, but at that point, rather than adjourn, we would be asking you, Mr Speaker, to suspend the House and to resume the sitting at 7 am tomorrow. That would allow those members who have commitments in other parts of the country to deal with everything in a fairly orderly way and then complete deliberations when all the messages are in tomorrow. For those people who are assigned to the adjournment debate, I'll speak with the Manager of Opposition Business and we may still create a procedure that allows those speeches to happen between 4.30 pm and 5 pm, but we'll continue to receive messages until about 6 pm today. At that point we would suspend with the intention of ringing the bells at 6.55 am tomorrow. STATEMENT BY THE SPEAKER 1 STATEMENT BY THE SPEAKER National Anti-Corruption Commission 1 09:02 The SPEAKER 53517 The President of the Senate, the Attorney-General, the national anticorruption commissioner and I have signed a memorandum of understanding regarding the exercise of the commission's investigative powers where parliamentary privilege may be involved. The purpose of this MOU is to agree to processes that will be followed when the commission exercises its statutory powers in circumstances where issues of parliamentary privilege could arise. These agreed processes are designed to ensure that parliamentary privilege is respected while permissible action by the commission to detect and investigate corrupt conduct is not inhibited. I would like to acknowledge the work of the President, members of the MOU working group and the national anticorruption commissioner in negotiating this agreement. I present a copy of the MOU and I can also indicate to all members that the President and I will be writing to all members of parliament providing copies of the MOU. STATEMENTS ON SIGNIFICANT MATTERS 1 STATEMENTS ON SIGNIFICANT MATTERS Environment 1 Reference to Federation Chamber 6 09:35 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney by leave—I move: That further statements on international environmental leadership be permitted in the Federation Chamber. Question agreed to. Mental Health 6 Reference to Federation Chamber 8 09:51 Ms McBRIDE 248353 Dobell by leave—I move: That further statements on strengthening Medicare through mental health be permitted in the Federation Chamber. Question agreed to. MOTIONS 8 MOTIONS Gambling Advertising 8 09:51 Ms SHARKIE 265980 Mayo I seek leave to move the following motion: That the House: notes that the Government, under the leadership of the Minister for Communications, has failed to take any action to reduce gambling advertising, 17 months after receiving unanimous recommendations from a Labor-chaired committee; calls on the Minister for Communications to explain to the House why the Government has failed to take any actions; and calls on the Government to either: introduce its own legislation on gambling advertising; or allow other bills that seek to address the harms caused by gambling advertising to be debated in this House. Leave not granted. Ms SHARKIE 265980 I move: That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Mayo from moving the following motion—That the House: notes that the Government, under the leadership of the Minister for Communications, has failed to take any action to reduce gambling advertising, 17 months after receiving unanimous recommendations from a Labor-chaired committee; calls on the Minister for Communications to explain to the House why the Government has failed to take any actions; and calls on the Government to either: introduce its own legislation on gambling advertising; or allow other bills that seek to address the harms caused by gambling advertising to be debated in this House. We have waited 17 months since a unanimous report, You win some, you lose more, was handed down in June 2023 by a committee chaired by the late Peta Murphy. It's been 17 months of hand-wringing and 17 months of, 'Oh, we're thinking about it. We're going to do something,' but absolutely nothing has happened. This is potentially the last day of the parliament and potentially the last day for this term, and still we have nothing. It is shameful. The committee found that many Australians are frustrated by gambling advertising. They noted that gambling is heavily marketed through popular sports. We know that it is young people, young men in particular, who are being targeted by gambling advertising. We know that we're now at $32 billion that we lose as a nation. Gambling is largely targeted at young men, particularly may I say tradies. These are young men who are getting together with their mates, and they're told to bet with their mates, yet we have nothing. That is why we need to suspend standing orders. This is a national emergency. We are the biggest losers in the world on a per capita basis. We're now at a per capita loss of more than $1,500 for every man, woman and child in this nation, yet we do nothing in this place. We must act on this. This is the last day of the parliamentary sitting year, potentially the last day this parliament, and yet nothing. That report by the late Peta Murphy, who was sick while she was chairing that committee—she was sick and yet she was so passionate and so dedicated on this issue that she didn't let it go; she didn't stand down as chair. She wanted to make sure that report happened, that those recommendations were made. And for what? For naught. Nothing is happening in here on this. I think it's appalling that the government has done nothing. I want the minister to come in and explain to this parliament why. If not, I want the minister to introduce legislation. The Australian community deserves that legislation to be introduced. If we can deal with other pieces of legislation with lightning speed, why not act on this? I implore the government to think of the late Peta Murphy. Do the right thing by the late Peta Murphy. At least ensure we act on some of the recommendations in the report that she gave her heart and soul to. 09:56 Ms WARE 300123 Hughes I second that motion. Barely weeks after being elected in 1996 then prime minister John Howard's leadership, political courage and integrity were put to the test on the issue of gun ownership following the tragic mass shooting at Port Arthur. It was a test that John Howard well and truly passed. Australians have lower rates of gun ownership than our counterparts and have not been victims of the mass shootings and other horrific events that have occurred in other parts of the world, especially in the United States. John Howard had to stare down much of his voter base and convince his coalition partners and those in the regions that this was necessary for the long-term safety of Australians. This Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, has so far missed the opportunity to demonstrate strong leadership, moral courage and political conviction on a national, social and health epidemic, the impact of online gambling on those experiencing gambling harm. Mr Coleman 241067 Scare tactics. Ms WARE 300123 I note the comments from my colleague; the member of Banks and I agree: the Prime Minister has shown no leadership and he's scared. More than 17 months after the parliamentary committee, of which I was a member, handed down its bipartisan and unanimous report, You win some, you lose more, including 31 recommendations, Anthony Albanese and Communication Minister Rowland are yet to respond to the report. As a committee, we heard evidence from those with lived experience of gambling harm, including families suffering from financial ruin, homelessness and, most devastatingly, Australians living with suicidality, as well as many who had taken their own lives as a result of gambling harm, gambling addiction. I want to also point out the work that went into this report by the member for Menzies and the member for Cowper, who were the two other members of the coalition on that inquiry. The report recommended broadly that a national regulatory teamwork be established to address the problem on a national basis through a public health lens. Those who gave evidence are similarly bewildered as to the delay from the Labor government. Only a couple of weeks ago, Anna Bardsley, who gave evidence to the inquiry, made a trip to Canberra to meet with the Prime Minister. She was not given an audience with the Prime Minister. Let's think of all the other people who've been given audiences with this Prime Minister over the past couple of weeks. Anna Bardsley was given an audience with me. Anna and her colleagues spoke with me about having committed extraordinary theft to feed their gambling habits, and one lady had served a prison sentence of four years. She'd stolen more than $400,000, which she has repaid, but her life has been destroyed. Another spoke to me about first gambling at the age of seven as well as the social impacts online gambling has had on his community of Asian Australians. On 10 October, the member for Menzies, Keith Wolahan, and I both asked questions of Minister Rowlands in question time about the likely timing of a response to the report. She failed to answer that question. She also failed to answer the question about which recommendations she supported and which she did not support. The Prime Minister has disregarded questions on this. He has said, 'Oh, I'm not going to stand in the way of Australians having a bit of a flutter or a punt.' But that's not what this is about. Australians love a punt. We spend approximately $25 billion on legal wages each year, with close to 40 per cent of the population gambling weekly. We spent close to $1 billion on the Melbourne Cup. We are the only nation that stops for a horse race. I support this motion, and I call on the Prime Minister to similarly support this motion and stand up on online gambling harm. 10:01 Mr JONES A9B Whitlam I move: That the debate be adjourned. The SPEAKER 53517 The question is that the debate be adjourned.    

The House divided. [10:05]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

71 AYES Aly, A. Ananda-Rajah, M. Belyea, J. A. Bowen, C. E. Burke, A. S. Burnell, M. P. Burney, L. J. Burns, J. Butler, M. C. Byrnes, A. J. Charlton, A. H. G. Chesters, L. M. Clare, J. D. Claydon, S. C. Coker, E. A. Collins, J. M. Conroy, P. M. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. Freelander, M. R. Garland, C. M. L. Georganas, S. Giles, A. J. Gorman, P. Gosling, L. J. 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. 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'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. Scrymgour, M. R. Shorten, W. R. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Vamvakinou, M. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. Wilson, J. H. Zappia, A. 63 NOES Archer, B. K. Bandt, A. P. Bates, S. J. Bell, A. M. Birrell, S. J. Boyce, C. E. Broadbent, R. E. Buchholz, S. Caldwell, C. M. Chandler-Mather, 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. Gee, A. R. 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. 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. Scamps, S. A. Sharkie, R. C. C. Spender, A. M. Steggall, Z. Stevens, J. Sukkar, M. S. Taylor, A. J. Tehan, D. T. Thompson, P. Tink, K. J. van Manen, A. J. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Ware, J. L. Watson-Brown, E. Webster, A. E. Wilkie, A. D. Willcox, A. J. Wilson, R. J. Wolahan, K. Young, T. J. 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

 BUSINESS 11 BUSINESS Rearrangement 11 10:09 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I move: That business intervening before order of the day No. 1, government business, be postponed until a later hour this day. That allows us to get on with some of the legislation debate, and it means we'll do some of the introductions later in the day. Question agreed to. Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders 11 10:09 Mr BURKE DYW Watson As I advised the House earlier, to make sure that we can have those arrangements where we stay on a bit later today—and this is on the Notice Paper—I move: That standing order 31 (automatic adjournment of the House) and standing order 33 (limit on business after normal time of adjournment) be suspended for the sitting commencing on Thursday, 28 November 2024. As I said before, I'll consult during the day with the Manager of Opposition Business, and I may come back with a further procedural motion that will allow the adjournment debate to take place. Question agreed to. MOTIONS 11 MOTIONS Gambling Advertising 11 10:10 Mr WILKIE C2T Clark I seek leave to move the following motion: That the House: (1) notes that the Government is refusing to even debate the need for a gambling advertising ban; and (2) condemns the Government for its complete disregard of the community's desire to ban gambling advertising and for the terrible harm such advertising facilitates. Leave not granted. Mr WILKIE C2T I move: That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Clark from moving the following motion—That the House: (1) notes that the Government is refusing to even debate the need for a gambling advertising ban; and (2) condemns the Government for its complete disregard of the community's desire to ban gambling advertising and for the terrible harm such advertising facilitates. I have not seen a more egregious and shocking abandonment of the public interest than this government's refusal to implement a ban on gambling advertising. I can only deduce that this government remains absolutely scared stiff of the gambling companies, absolutely scared stiff of the TV and media companies and absolutely scared stiff of the major sporting codes who receive a payment from the gambling companies every time a bet is laid on a game. This government simply does not care about the community interest. This government does not care that incessant gambling advertising has the effect of grooming children for a lifetime of gambling and, for many of those children, many years of gambling addiction. This government does not care two hoots about the way the incessant and continual gambling advertising is ruining our enjoyment of watching the telly, going on a device and, particularly, watching a game of sport. They simply don't care about the human toll of gambling addiction, and that's ultimately what this is about—it's the human toll of gambling addiction. Gambling addiction ruins lives, ruins families, ruins businesses and takes lives. I think of a constituent of mine I met just recently. This constituent is a recovering gambling addict. He cannot watch TV. He cannot watch a streaming service. He can't even surf the net, because every gambling ad is a trigger for his addiction. Why don't we care about such hurt in the community? Why is the government so beholden to the gambling companies, so beholden to the media companies and so beholden to the major sporting codes? I'll tell you why: because they're gutless. They're completely and utterly gutless, and the arguments that are put up to defend their position are just undiluted filth. They do not withstand the slightest scrutiny. It's not too complex an issue to address. We have a blueprint. The Peta Murphy inquiry gave us the blueprint. It did the work. It heard from the witnesses. It teased out the issue. It gave us the solution. We treat that committee's work, all the witnesses who fronted that committee and the committee's chair with contempt when we throw that report in the bin and say, 'Nuh, we'll worry about it later.' There are arguments that it will be the death of commercial TV. Well, I say to the commercial TV companies—the companies, by the way, who are refusing to report the debate about banning gambling advertising—that if your business model relies on facilitating gambling addiction then your business model is broken. You don't deserve to be in business if your business model relies on stoking gambling addiction and grooming children for a lifetime of gambling in the full knowledge that some of those children will grow up to be gambling addicts and some of them, sadly, will even take their lives as a direct result of it. The arguments that are put to us are reminiscent of the arguments in the debate around the ban on tobacco advertising in the 1970s and 1980s. Remember that? We were told that, if we banned cigarette advertising, it would be the end of cricket. Good God! What an absurdity! That argument back then in the seventies and eighties was no more ridiculous than the arguments that are being put forward by the government now. Heavens! We heard the Prime Minister in Perth a couple of months ago say the problem is poker machines. Okay, then do something about poker machines! Just, for heaven's sake, do something! Use the tax powers. Use the Corporations Act. Use all the levers at your disposal, instead of just kicking the can down the road and not giving two hoots about the hundreds of thousands of Australians who are either gambling addicts or recovering gambling addicts. While I'm at it, let me make a comment about the relevant minister. The relevant minister is refusing to drive gambling advertising reform. The relevant minister failed at the attempt to introduce a misinformation and disinformation act. The same minister is driving this ludicrous proposal to ban social media for people under the age of 16, despite the good that social media does as well as the harm. I reckon the minister should go. That the government is keeping that minister on the frontbench down there just beggars belief and is part of the problem. I will leave it at that. Hopefully in the remaining time there might be contributions from other honourable members. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 230531 Is the motion seconded? 10:16 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher I'm very pleased to second the motion. I want to acknowledge the member for Clark and the great work he's done since he's been in this place about antigambling. A lot of people ask me why I am so anti gambling. I think it stems from when I was young apprentice. I remember as a young kid—I was probably 18 or 19 years old—and we were reroofing a TAB. Here I am, on the roof, reroofing this TAB, and I saw countless young men coming in over the course of two or three days—in and out, in and out. I thought, 'I wonder how much they are actually losing?' It turns out we are losing somewhere between $25 billion and $32 billion a year. That's 12 University of the Sunshine Coast hospitals that could be built. What really saddens me—and this goes directly to the issue—is this government's failure and its cowardice to deal with sports-betting advertising. When's the last time you had a conversation with your son, daughter or grandson about sport without them talking about the odds? When I was a kid—it was a while ago now—we used to swap footy cards. We'd know who the first person was who'd kicked a goal and who won man of the match and all those sorts of details. But, now, because of the way that the gambling companies have infiltrated sport, it's all about the odds. Young kids do not seem to be able to differentiate between gambling and sport, and that breaks my heart. I think that is really, really sad. Australia is a sporting nation. We love sport. We play sport. We watch sport. But we do it to win the game, not to gamble. But these particularly insidious international gambling companies flood our televisions with this incessant advertising. I can't tell you how many times I have received emails from mums and dads—but usually mums, it has to be said—who plead with me as a federal member of parliament to do something to stop this connection between gambling ads and sport. I think it was the Leader of the Opposition's budget in reply speech about two years ago when he stood up and said that, if he was elected Prime Minister at the next election, he would do something about this. The coalition, once again, like for social media and for so many other things, have been dragging this government around kicking and screaming about policy. And yet, today still, the Minister for Communications is nowhere to be seen. Does everybody remember how when Peta Murphy died—God rest her soul—the government held Peta in such high regard and said this report was so important? Where are those comments now? I worked with Peta Murphy on a previous committee—the social policy and legal affairs committee. She worked with me; I worked with her on similar reforms. But where is the government today in honouring her legacy and leadership on gambling reform? They're nowhere to be seen. Why? It's because this government is utterly weak. It is weak on every level and every policy. It is absolutely caught by the big gambling companies. It stands condemned. It needs to stand up, grow a backbone and get these laws passed. (Time expired) 10:21 Ms KEARNEY LTU Cooper I move: That the debate be adjourned. The SPEAKER 53517 The question is that the debate be adjourned.    

The House divided. [10:26]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

 71 AYES Aly, A. Ananda-Rajah, M. Belyea, J. A. Bowen, C. E. Burke, A. S. Burnell, M. P. Burney, L. J. Burns, J. Butler, M. C. Byrnes, A. J. Charlton, A. H. G. Chesters, L. M. Clare, J. D. Claydon, S. C. Coker, E. A. Collins, J. M. Conroy, P. M. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. 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. 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'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. Scrymgour, M. R. Shorten, W. R. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Vamvakinou, M. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. Wilson, J. H. Zappia, A. 30 NOES Archer, B. K. Bandt, A. P. Bates, S. J. Boyce, C. E. Broadbent, R. E. Buchholz, S. Caldwell, C. M. Chandler-Mather, M. Chaney, K. E. (Teller) Chester, D. J. Conaghan, P. J. Daniel, Z. Gee, A. R. Haines, H. M. Joyce, B. T. G. Kennedy, S. P. Le, D. Pearce, G. B. Ryan, M. M. Scamps, S. A. Sharkie, R. C. C. Steggall, Z. Tink, K. J. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Ware, J. L. Watson-Brown, E. Wilkie, A. D. (Teller) Wolahan, K. Young, T. J. 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

 BILLS 14 BILLS Future Made in Australia (Production Tax Credits and Other Measures) Bill 2024 14

Future Made in Australia (Production Tax Credits and Other Measures) Bill 2024

Second Reading 14 10:31 Mr BOYCE 299498 Flynn I rise to resume my contribution to the Future Made in Australia (Production Tax Credits and Other Measures) Bill 2024. We were talking about Stanwell Corporation in Gladstone, which is proposing to build a liquefied hydrogen and gaseous hydrogen production plant in Gladstone. This is in conjunction with several international consortiums—among them, Iwatani, Marubeni and Keppel. Recently we've understood that the Japanese Kansai Electric Power Company has withdrawn from the proposal. You would have to ask yourself: why is that? They continually quote the same things—the economic cost of producing hydrogen, liquid hydrogen, and transporting hydrogen. We've seen other companies, such as Fortescue, Origin, Woodside, Krupp steel—the German steelmaker—and so forth also withdraw their support from these huge proposed hydrogen projects, purely based on the economic costs of them. With respect to the Gladstone proposal, Stanwell Corporation is proposing to make an 800-tonnes-per-day liquid hydrogen facility and also to produce 1,200 tonnes of gaseous hydrogen. They also intend to build an ammonia plant there. The problem with all of that is that, if you actually analyse what their proposals are, they are going to be enormous. Global installed hydrogen liquefaction capacity is around 355 tonnes per day right now. The largest plant currently in operation has a capacity of 34 tonnes per day. The all-time largest hydrogen liquefaction plants were constructed at NASA during the 1950s and 1970s, and most recently-constructed plants are small in comparison. Nonetheless, even if specific energy demand of liquefaction can be significantly lower, the capital costs of liquefaction are still a significant part of the overall cost of liquefaction—even for larger plants. It is estimated that the capital investment consists of around 40 to 50 per cent of the specific liquefaction costs of these plants. We know that the largest liquefaction plant is at Cape Canaveral, at the Kennedy Space Centre—34 tonnes a day. What Stanwell is proposing is to build a plant that's capable of producing 800 tonnes per day. The storage capacity at Cape Canaveral is about 800 tonnes, so you would imagine that Stanwell would be proposing to build its storage capacity for at least 10 days production; therefore, we would need to have a storage capacity of something like 8,000 tonnes. The reality of this project is that it could possibly be 10 times bigger than the liquid hydrogen facility at Cape Canaveral at the Kennedy Space Center right here at Gladstone. That then raises questions of the enormous capital cost involved in doing this, like why is that these large international companies are withdrawing their support? As I have said before, Fortescue, Origin, Woodside, Krupp Steel in Germany and now Kansai—a Japanese electric company that was part of this original consortium—have now withdrawn their support and it is all over money, the economic cost of it. Saul Kavonic, energy analyst at MST Marquee, said 'green hydrogen economics are so uncompetitive that even with generous government subsidies and a captive buyer, it still struggles to work'. For me, I would ask the question: why is the federal government supporting a Queensland government GOC along with the previous state government investing millions and millions of taxpayers' dollars in projects that are economically unviable? We have people living in cars, people living in tents, families that can't send their children to sporting practice yet here we have governments continually wasting money on what is clearly economic madness. The government's Future Made in Australia (Production Tax Credits and Other Measures) Bill 2024. proposes to bring about a regime where they will give tax credits to try and alleviate the cost of producing things like liquid hydrogen and gaseous hydrogen and, once again, the numbers simply don't stack up. I want to talk about another point—that is, First Nations procurement—which I outlined earlier in my contribution. We know from the documents that Stanwell has put before the EPBC office that already there have been agreements for reparations and inclusion of First Nations people and so forth in these projects. In the documents it says that memorandums of understanding agreements have been made; however, these agreements will not be made public because of their sensitive nature. Well, I take great exception to that. This is taxpayers' money we are dealing with, with both state governments and the previous federal government, who are dealing with a Queensland government GOC with taxpayers' funds. Why can't we be transparent and accountable about who is doing these deals with the First Nations proponents? What exactly are they and how much money is involved? This is, once again, why I call for Aboriginal corporations to come under Australian corporate law so that we can see where all of this money is going, who is making these deals and the numbers involved. As I've outlined, these projects are economically not sound and green hydrogen as a viable alternative into the future is a long, long way off. We just simply do not have the technology to do that. The World Steel Association in their fact sheet have said the world produces about 70 million tonnes of hydrogen right now. Three-quarters of that hydrogen is produced from natural gas, about one-quarter produced from coal. If we were to change that and produce that 70 million tonnes of hydrogen through green energy and so forth using wind turbines, solar panels and batteries, the amount of energy required to do that would be 3,600 terawatts hours of energy—renewable energy. That is more than the entire generating capacity of the EU. So, once again, I would question building an 800-tonne-per-day liquid hydrogen facility in Gladstone, 1,200 tonnes a day of gaseous hydrogen, building ammonia plants and so forth. How many wind turbines, solar panels and batteries will be required to be installed in Central Queensland to make this thing work? It simply doesn't make economic sense, and that is why I and the coalition do not support this bill. 10:40 Ms SWANSON 264170 Paterson A Future Made in Australia is the flagship policy for the Albanese Labor government, but, more importantly than that, this $22.7 billion investment guides and positions us towards a shared goal of rebuilding our nation's domestic manufacturing base and also participating in a new global economy that is upon us right now. If we are not fleet footed, sure footed and front footed, we will be last in this global race. We have everything we need to be part of it, and we must lead the way. We are going to be securing good jobs for blue-collar workers. We're going to be part of this emerging world market for new forms of energy like hydrogen. The Future Made in Australia (Production Tax Credits and Other Measures) Bill 2024 is a vital element of ensuring the success not only of this policy but, quite frankly, of our country in a world that is ever hungry for energy and ever innovating. We have the critical minerals. We have the things that are absolutely required to take us on this journey. This is the way of the future, and it is the future of Australia. We must be part of it. We know our short-term and immediate policy initiatives have been strong and effective: tax credits for every taxpayer, energy bill relief and cheaper medicines, just to name a few. Through these measures, we have put more money back into the accounts and pockets of every Australian taxpayer, and that counts. This piece of legislation is going to help secure the future of our economy. We know we can't click our fingers and arrive at the finish line in that global race straightaway. We know that things take time. But, like all good governments, we have put in the hard yards to build responsible policy. We're now building long-term policy, and we are future focused, and that's what these production tax credits are about. They are about saying to companies, 'We are going to give you a credit because you are paving a new way and charting a new course for our future.' Yes, some of the technology is still emerging, but we have to be part of it. We can't get left behind. Our government has been clear and transparent about our ideals, our intentions and our aspirations in designing a road map for a more resilient Australia, and we saw this during COVID. We saw very clearly that there is a delicate balance between trading with the rest of the world and having that trade reduced by something like a viral pandemic. We do need a certain amount of resilience in our own manufacturing sector, so we have to strike that incredibly important balance between what we can mine and manufacture here and what we, importantly, trade with the rest of the world. This is what smart governments do. We don't turn our back and face in one singular direction. This is a multifaceted, multidirectional and, quite frankly, multitechnology world that we live in, and we must be part of it. For many decades, we were considered world leaders in energy, and we still are. We keep the lights on in places like Tokyo, Taipei and Beijing with our incredible coal, which is mined in places like my electorate and that of my friend and colleague the member for Hunter, and we know that that's an enormous part of our current energy mis. But we also know that, as the Minister for Resources has said time and time again in this parliament, the road to net zero runs through the Australian resources industry, including things like critical minerals. This bill is going to deliver targeted economic investments in key industries such as renewable hydrogen and critical minerals, and it's going to unlock private investment. I couldn't be prouder to support this bill today, and I just say to those opposite: get on board, because we cannot be left behind in this race. 10:44 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler These production tax credits are central to our government's vision for a future made in Australia. They are part of our economic plan to create good jobs, drive new investment and deliver stronger growth, because our government understands that building Australia's future is about making more things here; adding value here, investing in skills and training and in science and research here; turning the resources under our soil and in our skies into products on our shores; and building an economy where manufacturing is as strong as mining—an economy connected to the boundless opportunities of Asia and one where we make things here in Australia, make the most of the world-leading advantage we have in clean energy, critical minerals and rare earths, and use that advantage to power a new generation of secure, well-paid jobs in our regions and in our suburbs. Our plan is about building an economy that is more resilient and more diversified, more productive and more prosperous, more self-reliant and more secure—because being more secure depends on becoming more self-reliant. One of the defining lessons of the pandemic and its economic aftershocks is that if you're always the last link in the global supply you will always be vulnerable. The fewer things we make here, the more exposed we are to international uncertainty, whatever form it takes—be it a pandemic, conflict or economic and strategic competition. I was speaking with other nations at the G20 and APEC last week. None of us know exactly what the next shock will look like, but all of us know that there will be another one—a new challenge to meet. In an interconnected global economy, distance is no barrier to this uncertainty, and isolation is certainly not an answer. We can't cut ourselves off. We have to build ourselves up, by strengthening our economic and energy security, boosting Australian manufacturing, driving new investment in critical minerals and green hydrogen, and unlocking new green industries of the future. That is what this legislation, the Future Made in Australia (Production Tax Credits and Other Measures) Bill 2024, is all about. Our plan aims to do much more than shield us from international adversity. This is about creating future prosperity as well. It's about seizing the generational opportunity of the global shift to net zero, because that's not some distant prospect. The biggest economic change since the Industrial Revolution is underway already, and it's happening here in our region—the fastest-growing region of the world in human history. Australia can shape this change. We can seize this opportunity. We can power it with our resources. Above all, we can make sure that our workers and communities benefit from it, for this generation and the next. We have an unprecedented chance to create a new source of comparative advantage for Australian industry. For decades, we've been told that other nations with large populations and low wages have the comparative advantage when it comes to manufacturing. But, in a world where we're moving to net zero and where the nature of production has changed so that the costs of labour are far less a proportion of the inputs compared to the rising costs of issues such as transport, we are in a position where we have a unique set of national strengths that we can turn to our advantage. We have the critical minerals and materials to drive global decarbonisation, not just here but offshore as well. We have the best solar resources in the world. We have the skilled workers. We have the space; we have the room to grow and to co-locate extraction, refining and processing and to co-locate energy generation and storage with manufacturing. That is the opportunity that we have to support global emissions reductions while creating new jobs and prosperity here at home. It's an opportunity we have as a nation, but only if we move now and act with purpose and urgency. That's why this decade is so critical for Australia in defining the success or otherwise of our economy for decades ahead. This will only occur if we back our job-creating industries and our skilled and productive workers, and that's precisely what these tax credits are about. They reward companies that move first—that invest, build and seek out new sources of growth and new markets. Importantly, these tax credits pay on success. This is a point that seems to have escaped the opposition from day one. The clue is there in the name. If there's no production, there's no credit. That's why this model is good for business and good for the taxpayers. Production tax credits create certainty for investors. They bring forward value, they build in a guaranteed level of return, and they make projects bankable earlier than otherwise, meaning more initiatives get past that initial barrier—they get over the hump. This is about attracting private capital, not replacing it, aligning our national security and our economic security and making government a catalyst for new investment in critical minerals and green hydrogen at every stage. It will create new mining jobs, processing and refining jobs and technology and manufacturing jobs, moving Australia up the global value chain and forging new links in that chain right across our nation. The Treasurer announced these tax credits in this year's budget speech, and barely five minutes after he had sat down the opposition leader and the shadow Treasurer announced they'd be opposing them. They said it that very night. It took them five minutes to write off a whole new generation of prosperity. Talk about reckless! It took five minutes to say they weren't interested in creating new jobs in ports, mines and processing and manufacturing centres all over Australia. It took five minutes to dismiss the aspirations of millions of Australians who want to know that their children can hope for good jobs with decent pay and a secure future. Talk about arrogant! Now, when parliament rises, those opposite have to go back to their communities and tell the people whose interests they are supposed to represent that they voted against them. They voted against new investment, new jobs and new industry in the regions. But, when parliament is here in February, those opposite in the Senate will have to determine what their position is. I've heard strong support from the crossbenchers in the House and Senate, including the Greens political party. I haven't had anyone except for the Liberal Party and the National Party say they're against this—apparently because it's got something to do with the new economy! Change happens, and you can either shape change or be shaped by it. You can be passive while the world changes around us, but the shift to net zero is happening. It's up to those opposite to see whether they vote against new investment, new jobs and new industry in the regions, which is primarily where this will be focused. Their opposition leader has some kind of pathological objection to fair wages and secure work in Australian manufacturing—so much that he's prepared to sacrifice all these jobs and all this opportunity in the name of his fixation on nuclear power sometime into the 2040s. This is an opportunity right now. Instead of seizing this chance here and now, the Liberals and Nationals say we should burn hundreds of billions of dollars on the most expensive form of energy there is to build nuclear reactors sometime in the 2040s, which will produce less than four per cent of Australia's energy needs. Never has so much taxpayer money offered so little to so few. For our Labor government, and every member on this side of the House, this vote is straightforward. Our Western Australian members will be voting for this legislation because they know it's fantastic for jobs in WA—and I suspect the member for Curtin is in here to say exactly the same thing. Our Queensland members will be voting for this because they know it's great for jobs in Queensland. The member for Solomon and the member the Lingiari will be voting for this legislation because it's fantastic for the Northern Territory. And our MPs from right across the country will be voting for this legislation because it's good for jobs, wages and new opportunities in every part of our country. We're the party of jobs, and we want to represent all Australians and the national interest. We're not frightened of the future; we want to seize the future. That's the difference between the two approaches we see in this chamber. Our government is acting on the cost of living to help people here and now, but we're also building the future. We are navigating the rough seas without taking our eyes off the horizon, because you have to be able to do both. If you think about Curtin and Chifley, their great Labor government established the Department of Post-War Reconstruction in December 1942. Just think about that. At the height of the Second World War, they were dealing with the challenge of defending our country in our darkest hour but looking towards the future. When the fine men and women who'd defended our nation returned home postwar, what was going to happen to give them a future and give them jobs and prosperity? They understood that planning for a stronger and fairer economy after the war couldn't wait until peacetime. In the same way, we can't wait for a time when all is calm and quiet in the global economy. If we hesitate and we hang back, this opportunity will pass us by. If we fall back into the delay and denial of the past decade, the world will leave us behind. If we turn our backs on all the advantages our nation has in order to chase after a nuclear obsession that costs too much, takes too long and delivers far too little way too late, then the chance to make our future here in Australia will be gone for good. That's the choice the House has when it votes today. I'm confident that the Future Made in Australia legislation that has already passed this House will pass the Senate today with the support of all the non-coalition members, who have indicated their support for that legislation. They know that a future made in Australia is about the jobs, wages, conditions and living standards of the people who send us here. If they're not for a future made in Australia, I just wonder where they think the future should be made for Australians. It is frankly astonishing that the National Party—whatever differences I would have with them—once stood up for nationalism. You could count upon them to vote for Australian jobs and for defending Australian industry. They have walked away from this and have adopted some rather strange positions. They somehow think that they should just sit back and watch these opportunities drift away. The House will have a choice today. It's a choice the Australian people will have next year. In standing against this legislation, those opposite make it clear that they stand for higher power bills, lower wages and fewer opportunities for future generations. By contrast, today, our Labor government is voting for cheaper and cleaner energy. We're voting for new jobs in new industries and new projects in the regions. We're voting to make things here. We're voting to make the most of this moment. We're voting for a future made here in Australia. That's what we'll be asking Australians to vote for in 2025 as well. I commend the bill to the House. 10:59 Mr BANDT M3C Melbourne The best job for a coalminer is very often another mining job. As we transition away from coal and gas—because we know that coal and gas are the causes of the climate crisis—we owe a debt to the workers and the communities who have delivered coal and gas, who have helped power this country up to this point and who have helped deliver prosperity. We know something about coal and gas that we didn't know before: we know that coal and gas are causing the climate crisis. That is not the fault of coal and gas workers. We owe coal and gas workers a debt of thanks. In the past we've moved away from harmful industries like asbestos, and we're now trying to move away from others. We know that we can't keep opening new coal and gas mines and have any chance of having a safer climate. That is the science. Every primary school student understands that coal and gas are driving pollution and that pollution is driving the climate crisis. We need to ensure that we provide good, secure, well-paid, high-paid jobs for people who now work in coal and gas communities and for the other people and businesses around them that rely on that. That's why the Greens have said very clearly for years now—and have been pushing this very hard—that we need a plan in this country to ensure that we grow those industries, including critical minerals, that will not only give Australia jobs and things to sell to the rest of the world in a zero pollution society but will also provide well-paid, secure work for the workers in the coal and gas communities. In many places—for example, in Queensland—the people who work in coal and gas are not necessarily that far away geographically from the places where almost exactly the same skills are going to be relied on, in areas like critical minerals and, potentially, green steel—even green hydrogen. In other words, if we do our jobs right in this place, we can ensure—in places like Queensland and Western Australia—as the country moves away from coal and gas, that industries and businesses will be grown to take their place. In many cases, they will be physically quite close by, or close enough, and they're going to need the same skills, the same services and the same industry support. Australia is actually blessed with a lot of the critical minerals that are going to be needed in a zero pollution world. We've got—I stand to be corrected—something close to the second-largest supply of vanadium, for example; if it's not exactly that, it's up there. There are products that are going to be used in, for example, industrial sized batteries and also in batteries in cars and in other products. We've got a lot of those products here. A lot of people around Australia are asking, 'Why aren't we investing more towards processing some of these minerals here instead of just digging everything up and shipping it offshore?' Mr Gosling 245392 That's what Middle Arm is about, mate. Mr BANDT M3C I know the Labor member who interjects thinks the only way you can do that is with gas, by fracking the Beetaloo. Mr Gosling 245392 Have you heard of SunCable? The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZY Order! The member on my right is not in his chair. Mr BANDT M3C The Labor member from the Northern Territory says that we've got to frack the Beetaloo, and that that is apparently the only way in which we can have a future. Well, that is wrong. We know that under the Beetaloo is a massive climate bomb that we cannot allow to be lit even though Labor and Liberal desperately want to light it. The member's walked out of the chamber because he knows that what I am saying is right. What we can do instead is accept that we need a transition plan to ensure that workers in communities don't lose incomes and that jobs and sustainable jobs are there. That's why, going to the last election, the Greens outlined a very detailed and comprehensive plan not only for a transition authority but also for job guarantees to ensure that workers who transitioned across didn't lose money and, in fact, that businesses were supported. We also outlined a comprehensive plan to support green metals and to call for exactly the kind of support that I've been talking about to support critical minerals. This bill, the Future Made in Australia (Production Tax Credits and Other Measures) Bill 2024, is a step towards that. And because it supports the growth of critical minerals that are going to be needed in a zero-pollution society, the Greens support it. I say very clearly to the people of Western Australia and to the people of Queensland, we would like to see this support, and more, flowing as quickly as possible to critical minerals. Of course, as the Greens, we say that we need to ensure that we have very good standards, world's best practice standards to protect our environment and to ensure that First Nations people have their position absolutely respected. We have seen it done very poorly in the past, in this country, and we have seen the rights of First Nations people and the rights of the environment be overridden. But I think we can do it all. We can respect First Nations people and our environment and also ensure that we grow the critical minerals sector in this country. That's why we will be supporting this bill. People in Western Australia and people in Queensland should know that the Greens are strong supporters, as we have been for many years now, of growing critical minerals, of green metals, of ensuring the industries are there in order for us to make the transition. But what I would say to the government is you have to stop sending mixed messages. You have to stop saying that the transition needs to happen and then backing new coal and gas projects. That's what the government are doing. In many respects, they're just talking out of both sides of their mouth. They bring in important legislation like this, and then they approve 28 new coal and gas projects. That leaves workers and communities confused. It leaves investment confused. One of the things we know, and we've heard the government say this about housing, is the government says, 'We haven't got enough investment, we haven't got enough workers, we haven't got enough skills.' The problem is if you send a message that you want to expand the green sector and critical minerals and green steel and green hydrogen but then you also say, 'We're going to approve new coal and gas projects at the rate of knots,' not only do you fast-track climate collapse, which is what this government is doing, but you divert resources, capital and workers away from it. If the government really wants the critical minerals sector to succeed, it will stop backing new coal and gas projects because they're going to be competing for the same workers and competing for investment as well as fast-tracking the climate collapse. Every time the government stands up and approves one of those 28 new coal and gas projects, workers and communities—they're not dumb; they're cluey. They look at it and they say: 'Hold on. You've told us we've got to get away from coal and gas and make the transition, but you've just approved a whole bunch of new climate-destroying projects.' It destroys confidence in the transition because you can't have it both ways, Labor. The coalition say they don't even believe in climate at all and they just want to fast-track climate collapse and have more coal and gas in the system and add nuclear on top of it, but the Labor Party come in and say they believe in renewables and the transition—but what they say and what they do are different things, because then they go and they open up and approve more coal and gas projects. We are at a massive climate tipping point and, at the recent climate summit, it was said that we may have already hit 1½ degrees and that may be out of reach. That is what some people are claiming now. They are saying very, very, very clearly that, if we want to avoid for our kids who are at primary school now climate collapse during their lifetime, we need to massively reduce emissions now and, at a minimum, we need to stop opening new coal and gas projects. That is the message from the scientists right now who are ringing the alarm bells. The atmosphere is full. There is just not capacity to put more CO2 or methane into it by opening up new coal and gas projects. So the government has a real opportunity here, which is to stop opening the new coal and gas projects and instead throw their full weight behind industries like green metals, green steel, green hydrogen and critical minerals. This bill, even though it may not have been exactly how we have would designed it, has the Greens' support because it is a very important step in the right direction. But the government now needs to answer to every parent who is worried about their kid's future and to everyone who doesn't want their kids to have to go through every summer wondering how many people are going to die in the next bushfire or the next heatwave why they keep approving new coal and gas projects. It is at directly at odds with the very good aims of this bill. I have not yet heard one of the members of the government come in and actually justify how they can say that they care about the climate crisis but also approve 28 new coal and gas projects. Some important data is going to be released in about an hour about climate in Australia. We will look at it with interest because what the data to date shows is that emissions are actually higher under Labor than they were under Scott Morrison. After people voted for climate action at the election, so far—again, we will see what the data says at 12 o'clock today—Labor has lifted emissions. Can you believe that? Labor has actually lifted emissions above where they were under Scott Morrison. If you approve 28 new coal and gas projects, it is absolutely no wonder. So I commend this bill to the House and we support it, but I urge the government to take the opportunity to reflect on the climate criminality of approving new coal and gas projects and the absolute reprehensibility of approving 28 new coal and gas projects in a time of climate crisis, as cars are being piled up in the streets in Spain and as there are floods and fires threatening again here. In the Northern Rivers in New South Wales, there are people who still haven't been able to get back into their homes after the last floods. There are people in Brisbane who can't afford to get insurance now. They can't afford to insure their inner-city homes. It's happening right around the country. Labor's opening of 28 new coal and gas projects is utterly reprehensible. I might just conclude, Deputy Speaker, with a question for you. I'm just inquiring as to whether the call no longer alternates in this place now or whether the call no longer goes to the person who is first on their feet. We just had two speakers on the government side. I understand that some members of government can get precedence, but surely that could be dealt with within the ordinary speaking arrangements. Given that standing order 65 requires the call to go to the person who is first on their feet and that general practice is that the call alternates, I just have a question for you, Deputy Speaker, as to whether we now have a different approach in this House where the call no longer alternates. If so, I think that the House would be interested in knowing that. The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZY You are quite correct: it's an alternative shot on each side. But when a senior minister or the Prime Minister is on their feet the precedent has been in the past that you can give the call to the Prime Minister or the senior minister, and that was the decision I made. 11:14 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith I move: That the debate be adjourned and the resumption of the debate made an order of the day for a later hour this day. The SPEAKER 53517 The question before the House is that the debate be adjourned.    

The House divided. [11:19]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

 73 AYES Aly, A. Ananda-Rajah, M. Belyea, J. A. Bowen, C. E. Burke, A. S. Burnell, M. P. Burney, L. J. Burns, J. Butler, M. C. Byrnes, A. J. Chalmers, J. E. Charlton, A. H. G. Chesters, L. M. Clare, J. D. Claydon, S. C. Coker, E. A. Collins, J. M. Conroy, P. M. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. 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. 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'Neil, C. E. Payne, A. E. Perrett, G. D. Phillips, F. E. Plibersek, T. J. Rae, S. T. Reid, G. J. Repacholi, D. P. Roberts, T. G. Rowland, M. A. Ryan, J. C. Scrymgour, M. R. Shorten, W. R. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Vamvakinou, M. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. Wilkie, A. D. Wilson, J. H. Zappia, A. 61 NOES Andrews, K. L. Archer, B. K. Bell, A. M. Birrell, S. J. Boyce, C. E. Broadbent, R. E. Buchholz, S. 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. Gee, A. R. 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. Le, D. Ley, S. P. Littleproud, D. Marino, N. B. McIntosh, M. I. O'Brien, E. L. O'Brien, L. S. Pearce, G. B. Pike, H. J. Pitt, K. J. Price, M. L. Ramsey, R. E. (Teller) Ryan, M. M. Scamps, S. A. Sharkie, R. C. C. Spender, A. M. Steggall, Z. Stevens, J. Sukkar, M. S. Taylor, A. J. Tehan, D. T. Thompson, P. Tink, K. J. van Manen, A. J. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Ware, J. L. Webster, A. E. Willcox, A. J. Wilson, R. J. Wolahan, K. Young, T. J. 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

 BUSINESS 21 BUSINESS Rearrangement 21 11:22 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I move: That business intervening before order of the day No. 14, government business, be postponed until a later hour this day. For the information of members, that is to bring on the supermarket-relevant legislation as the next item of business. I move: That the question be now put. The SPEAKER 53517 The question before the House is that the question be now put.    

The House divided. [11:24]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

73 AYES Aly, A. Ananda-Rajah, M. Belyea, J. A. Bowen, C. E. Burke, A. S. Burnell, M. P. Burney, L. J. Burns, J. Butler, M. C. Byrnes, A. J. Chalmers, J. E. Charlton, A. H. G. Chesters, L. M. Clare, J. D. Claydon, S. C. Coker, E. A. Collins, J. M. Conroy, P. M. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. 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. 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'Neil, C. E. Payne, A. E. Perrett, G. D. Phillips, F. E. Plibersek, T. J. Rae, S. T. Reid, G. J. Repacholi, D. P. Roberts, T. G. Rowland, M. A. Ryan, J. C. Scrymgour, M. R. Shorten, W. R. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Vamvakinou, M. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. Wilkie, A. D. Wilson, J. H. Zappia, A. 62 NOES Andrews, K. L. Archer, B. K. Bandt, A. P. Bell, A. M. Birrell, S. J. Boyce, C. E. Buchholz, S. 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. Gee, A. R. 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. Le, D. Ley, S. P. Littleproud, D. Marino, N. B. McIntosh, M. I. O'Brien, E. L. O'Brien, L. S. Pearce, G. B. Pike, H. J. Pitt, K. J. Price, M. L. Ramsey, R. E. (Teller) Ryan, M. M. Scamps, S. A. Sharkie, R. C. C. Spender, A. M. Steggall, Z. Stevens, J. Sukkar, M. S. Taylor, A. J. Tehan, D. T. Thompson, P. Tink, K. J. van Manen, A. J. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Ware, J. L. Watson-Brown, E. Webster, A. E. Willcox, A. J. Wilson, R. J. Wolahan, K. Young, T. J. 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

 11:26 The SPEAKER 53517 The question now before the House is that the motion moved by the Leader of the House be agreed to.    

The House divided. [11:27]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

 76 AYES Aly, A. Ananda-Rajah, M. Bandt, A. P. Belyea, J. A. Bowen, C. E. 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. Conroy, P. M. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. 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. 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'Neil, C. E. Payne, A. E. Perrett, G. D. Phillips, F. E. Plibersek, T. J. Rae, S. T. Reid, G. J. Repacholi, D. P. Roberts, T. G. Rowland, M. A. Ryan, J. C. Scrymgour, M. R. Shorten, W. R. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Vamvakinou, M. Watson-Brown, E. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. Wilkie, A. D. Wilson, J. H. Zappia, A. 60 NOES Andrews, K. L. Archer, B. K. Bell, A. M. Birrell, S. J. Boyce, C. E. Buchholz, S. 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. Gee, A. R. 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. Le, D. Ley, S. P. Littleproud, D. Marino, N. B. McIntosh, M. I. O'Brien, E. L. O'Brien, L. S. Pearce, G. B. Pike, H. J. Pitt, K. J. Price, M. L. Ramsey, R. E. (Teller) Ryan, M. M. Scamps, S. A. Sharkie, R. C. C. Spender, A. M. Steggall, Z. Stevens, J. Sukkar, M. S. Taylor, A. J. Tehan, D. T. Thompson, P. Tink, K. J. van Manen, A. J. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Ware, J. L. Webster, A. E. Willcox, A. J. Wilson, R. J. Wolahan, K. Young, T. J. 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

 MOTIONS 23 MOTIONS Parliamentary Procedure 23 11:29 Mr FLETCHER L6B Bradfield I move: That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Manager of Opposition Business moving the following motion immediately: That this House expresses its strong disapproval of this Government's contempt for good parliamentary process in bringing on debate on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Fairer for Families and Farmers and Other Measures) Bill 2024 within one day of the bill being introduced and without adequate notice to parliamentarians. This matter is urgent because of the disgraceful way that the government has conducted itself. This bill is still before a Senate committee— Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 The Manager of Opposition Business will pause. The members on my right and left, we're just going to do this in an orderly way. 11:30 Mr BURKE DYW Watson There is legislation we need to get across to the Senate. We don't have time to deal with this. I move: That the Member be no longer heard. The 53517 The question before the House is the member no longer be heard.    

The House divided. [11:34]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

72 AYES Aly, A. Ananda-Rajah, M. Belyea, J. A. Bowen, C. E. Burke, A. S. Burnell, M. P. Burney, L. J. Burns, J. Butler, M. C. Byrnes, A. J. Chalmers, J. E. Charlton, A. H. G. Chesters, L. M. Clare, J. D. Claydon, S. C. Coker, E. A. Collins, J. M. Conroy, P. M. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. 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. 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'Neil, C. E. Payne, A. E. Perrett, G. D. Phillips, F. E. Plibersek, T. J. Rae, S. T. Reid, G. J. Repacholi, D. P. Roberts, T. G. Rowland, M. A. Ryan, J. C. Scrymgour, M. R. Shorten, W. R. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Vamvakinou, M. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. Wilson, J. H. Zappia, A. 61 NOES Andrews, K. L. Archer, B. K. Bell, A. M. Birrell, S. J. Boyce, C. E. Buchholz, S. 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. Gee, A. R. 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. Le, D. Ley, S. P. Littleproud, D. Marino, N. B. McCormack, M. F. McIntosh, M. I. O'Brien, E. L. O'Brien, L. S. Pearce, G. B. Pike, H. J. Pitt, K. J. Price, M. L. Ramsey, R. E. (Teller) Ryan, M. M. Scamps, S. A. Sharkie, R. C. C. Spender, A. M. Steggall, Z. Stevens, J. Sukkar, M. S. Taylor, A. J. Tehan, D. T. Thompson, P. Tink, K. J. van Manen, A. J. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Ware, J. L. Webster, A. E. Willcox, A. J. Wilson, R. J. Wolahan, K. Young, T. J. 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

 11:35 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume I second the motion. 11:35 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I move: That the member be no longer heard. The 53517 The question before the House is that the member be no longer heard.    

The House divided. [11:37]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

72 AYES Aly, A. Ananda-Rajah, M. Belyea, J. A. Bowen, C. E. Burke, A. S. Burnell, M. P. Burney, L. J. Burns, J. Butler, M. C. Byrnes, A. J. Chalmers, J. E. Charlton, A. H. G. Chesters, L. M. Clare, J. D. Claydon, S. C. Coker, E. A. Collins, J. M. Conroy, P. M. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. 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. 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'Neil, C. E. Payne, A. E. Perrett, G. D. Phillips, F. E. Plibersek, T. J. Rae, S. T. Reid, G. J. Repacholi, D. P. Roberts, T. G. Rowland, M. A. Ryan, J. C. Scrymgour, M. R. Shorten, W. R. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Vamvakinou, M. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. Wilson, J. H. Zappia, A. 61 NOES Andrews, K. L. Archer, B. K. Bell, A. M. Birrell, S. J. Boyce, C. E. Buchholz, S. 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. Gee, A. R. 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. Le, D. Ley, S. P. Littleproud, D. Marino, N. B. McCormack, M. F. McIntosh, M. I. O'Brien, E. L. O'Brien, L. S. Pearce, G. B. Pike, H. J. Pitt, K. J. Price, M. L. Ramsey, R. E. (Teller) Ryan, M. M. Scamps, S. A. Sharkie, R. C. C. Spender, A. M. Steggall, Z. Stevens, J. Sukkar, M. S. Taylor, A. J. Tehan, D. T. Thompson, P. Tink, K. J. van Manen, A. J. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Ware, J. L. Webster, A. E. Willcox, A. J. Wilson, R. J. Wolahan, K. Young, T. J. 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

11:40 The SPEAKER 53517 The question before the House is the motion moved by the Manager of Opposition Business be agreed to.    

The House divided. [11:40]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

61 AYES Andrews, K. L. Archer, B. K. Bell, A. M. Birrell, S. J. Boyce, C. E. Buchholz, S. 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. Gee, A. R. 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. Le, D. Ley, S. P. Littleproud, D. Marino, N. B. McCormack, M. F. McIntosh, M. I. O'Brien, E. L. O'Brien, L. S. Pearce, G. B. Pike, H. J. Pitt, K. J. Price, M. L. Ramsey, R. E. (Teller) Ryan, M. M. Scamps, S. A. Sharkie, R. C. C. Spender, A. M. Steggall, Z. Stevens, J. Sukkar, M. S. Taylor, A. J. Tehan, D. T. Thompson, P. Tink, K. J. van Manen, A. J. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Ware, J. L. Webster, A. E. Willcox, A. J. Wilson, R. J. Wolahan, K. Young, T. J. 75 NOES Aly, A. Ananda-Rajah, M. Bandt, A. P. Belyea, J. A. Bowen, C. E. 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. Conroy, P. M. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. 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. 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'Neil, C. E. Payne, A. E. Perrett, G. D. Phillips, F. E. Plibersek, T. J. Rae, S. T. Reid, G. J. Repacholi, D. P. Roberts, T. G. Rowland, M. A. Ryan, J. C. Scrymgour, M. R. Shorten, W. R. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Vamvakinou, M. Watson-Brown, E. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. Wilson, J. H. Zappia, A. 0 PAIRS

Question negatived.

BILLS 27 BILLS Treasury Laws Amendment (Fairer for Families and Farmers and Other Measures) Bill 2024 27

Treasury Laws Amendment (Fairer for Families and Farmers and Other Measures) Bill 2024

Second Reading 27 11:43 The SPEAKER 53517 The Manager of Opposition Business is seeking the call on a point of order. Mr Fletcher L6B I want to move a motion. The SPEAKER 53517 Is it relevant to this item of business? Mr Fletcher L6B It is relevant. The SPEAKER 53517 I will hear what the Manager of Opposition Business has to say. Mr Fletcher L6B I want to move a motion that so much of standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent me moving the following motion immediately: that the Treasury Laws Amendment (Fairer for Families and Farmers and Other Measures) Bill be made an order of the day for the next sitting. The reason that this is urgent is that the government has flouted proper procedure. So we are suggesting an appropriate and proper procedure. The SPEAKER 53517 Alright. I've heard— Mr Fletcher L6B We're doing that in the spirit of friendship across the parliament but also offering some guidance— The SPEAKER 53517 The manager— Mr Fletcher L6B on how things ought to be run properly, instead of this chaotic, end-of-year— The SPEAKER 53517 The manager has made his point. Just pause for a moment. I had called the item on; the Clerk had read the order. We do need to make sure that, in between items—the Leader of the House on a point of order? Mr Burke DYW Mr Speaker, a suspension is an abuse if it simply revisits a decision that the House has just made. The most recent resolution of the House was that we would bring on item 14. We had already decided, in the last few minutes, to not do what the Manager of Opposition Business is proposing. The SPEAKER 53517 Further to the point of order? Mr Fletcher L6B Just on that point, Mr Speaker, very specifically: this motion is materially different from the previous one because it doesn't propose a method of not dealing with this; it very constructively proposes the right way to deal with it, which is that it should be made an order of the day for the next sitting. That's the perfectly appropriate and normal and natural process, and that is what we are suggesting, in a spirit of cooperation and with the same constructive approach that we have always brought to these matters—which, sadly, has not always been reciprocated. The SPEAKER 53517 Alright. I'll deal with— Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Everyone can resume their seats if they wish to interject; otherwise, we'll just keep everyone quiet for the moment while we deal with this matter. The House has made a determination to bring the item on; I've called the Clerk; he has listed that now. The difficulty I have is: if people want to move suspensions or arrangements, they need to do it between items—that's the issue. We have dealt with this kind of situation before, where variations on a theme have occurred, over and over again, and the House would get no work done if we were just continually to keep revisiting the same topic over and over again. I've called the Clerk. We're going to bring this item on. If we want to go back and visit that issue, it will have to be done between items, and in a slightly different set of words that I'll work with the manager on to deal with that. The SPEAKER 53517 Order. The member for Jagajaga. It's not a laughing matter. Order. The item has been called on. We can revisit this, after this item has been dealt with, to get through. If people want to do suspensions, right across the chamber, we'll do it in between items, and we can work to make sure that everyone gets what they need to achieve. So the question now is that the bill be read a second time. I'll put the question. Those of that opinion say aye— Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Against, no— Honourable members interjecting— Mr Fletcher L6B Can you restate the question? The SPEAKER 53517 Yes, that's okay. We'll restate the question. I'll explain it to the House again, so everyone knows. We're not dealing with your suspension again. We can revisit that, if the House needs to. The Clerk has called the item on. I'm stating the question. The question is that the bill be read a second time. So, if someone wishes to speak, they need to rise to their feet and give their speech to the House. And I give the call— Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! I give the call to the shadow Treasurer. 11:48 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume Labor has had 2½ years to make things fairer for farmers and families—2½ years, and they have comprehensively failed. I see the Treasurer leaving the chamber, because he has comprehensively failed to make things fairer for farmers and families. The SPEAKER 53517 The Minister for Resources will leave the chamber under 94(a). The member for Brand then left the chamber. The SPEAKER 53517 We are not having that sort of behaviour and that sort of interjection from people outside of their places. This may be the last day, but everyone is going to be treated with respect and we're all going to follow the standing orders. It's the least we can do. Now the shadow Treasurer is going to be heard in silence on this item, and anyone who interjects now—firm action will be taken. The shadow Treasurer has the call. Mr TAYLOR 231027 For 2½ years, Australian families and farmers have been waiting with bated breath for this government to take action, and this government has comprehensively failed. This weak, incompetent, arrogant government with this weak, incompetent, arrogant Prime Minister and this weak, incompetent, arrogant Treasurer have failed time and time again. They had three budgets, all giving them the opportunity to make life fairer for farmers and families, and this week we learn that, throughout the history of data collected in Australia, we have never seen a collapse in the Australian standard of living like we have seen in the last 2½ years under this weak and incompetent government. The result of that is that Australian families are suffering, Australian farmers are suffering, Australian small businesses are suffering, all Australians are suffering, because of the failures of this government. Despite the name of the bill, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Fairer for Families and Farmers and Other Measures) Bill 2024 is actually supposedly about competition policy, and we believe strongly in competition. But, for 2½ years, Labor have had the opportunity to bring forward a bill like this, and they've failed. In fact we've been calling for stronger competition throughout that time, and we introduced to the parliament a stronger bill than this one, and Labor refused to debate it. They refused to debate it. So what they've come forward with is too little too late. It is a bandaid on a bullet wound, because that's what they do to everything. They realise they've failed and they realise they haven't actually taken the right approach from the start, so they get the bandaid out and they put it on the bullet wound and then they say, 'It's still bleeding,' and they get another bandaid out. The truth is that they had the opportunity to fix this problem from the start—to focus on the source of the problem, not the symptoms. That's what we proposed in the bill we put forward, which we introduced but those opposite refused to even debate. We see now they're shutting down debate on everything. They're guillotining 42 bills in the Senate. For most of these we actually haven't seen the final versions. This one we've got in front of us today we saw two days ago. They had 2½ years. We put forward our own bill, and this one arrives two days before the final sitting week of the year. Who knows, this might be the final sitting week of this parliament. It is rushed without being thought through. That is how this government does absolutely everything, and the result of that is that, for the average working family, the cost of living has gone up by 18.9 per cent. The Prime Minister's little gold coin that he carries around used to be worth a dollar, but now it's about 82c and going down fast, because yesterday we learnt that core inflation, which is the preferred measure of inflation for the Reserve Bank, ain't going down; it's going up, from 3.2 to 3.5 per cent. And this hopeless Prime Minister, this arrogant, weak, incompetent Prime Minister, would not even confront that yesterday when asked a question about it. He was in denial. He thinks if you spin it enough it will be true. Well, you can't spin your way out of a cost-of-living crisis and you can't spin your way out of a standard-of-living crisis. You have to get on and do the right thing. You don't add $5 billion a year in spending on Canberra public servants. That is not what you do during a cost-of-living crisis. We have many fine public servants who work in this city, but let me tell you we shouldn't be adding $5 billion of cost at a time like this, because it drives inflation. We continue to see this sort of reckless spending from this government. Their failed referendum, of course, cost almost $500 million. We'll see the final tally in the end, but it's going to be around that kind of number. We will continue to see a rapid growth in spending. Deloitte Access Economics tells us we're on our way to a series of massive budget deficits in the coming years. There's no windfall. You can't rely on the windfalls when you spend like that. But, as I say, this bill is supposedly about competition policy. Sadly, they've thought about this at the last minute because they've finally realised that the cost of living is bearing down on and hurting Australians in a way that means something has to be done. The results of the failures are deeper than just a complete collapse in the standard of living. We've also seen a household recession on a scale we have never seen before. For six consecutive quarters, the GDP per person has been going backwards. They've opened the gates on immigration, with a million new people in just two years. They crow, 'Those people are growing the economy.' Sadly, though, they're not growing the economy on a per person basis, and the only thing that Australians notice is what's happening per person, because they're people. They're not a whole economy, they are people. That is something that those opposite haven't quite worked out. We went back through all the history of this and couldn't find another time where there were six consecutive quarters like this. The Treasurer stands up at the dispatch box and says, 'This happens from time to time.' We all heard him a couple of weeks back—'This happens from time to time.' No, it doesn't. The Treasurer has no idea. He thinks that the answer to every problem is more spin. He's very fond of alliteration. He had three Rs, which became four Rs. He has the Fs and the Ds—there's always two or three or four. I see the member for Parramatta having a good old laugh. He knows it's right. The truth is, as the member for Parramatta knows, that you can't beat inflation with alliteration. The alliteration driven recovery from this Treasurer—that's what he thinks he's going to do, and he won't and he hasn't and he can't, because he simply hasn't got a clue when it comes to the economy. We've seen Labor productivity go backwards by 6.3 per cent. Someone wears that. That's prosperity going backwards, because it's the P that really counts. Actually, there's a bit of alliteration the member for Parramatta likes: the three Ps, which are in his book. That's one of the better pieces of alliteration, because that's real economics, not the phony economics we hear from the Treasurer. He knows that productivity is the pathway to prosperity—there are a couple of Ps for you. Productivity is the pathway to prosperity, but productivity has gone backwards by 6.3 per cent. We all wear that when we don't have the productivity that we need. You can understand how this has happened, because this government thinks that the way to make the economy work is to wrap it in red tape and give more power to union officials. We've watched the CFMEU, with deep links to the criminal underworld, take control of our construction sites. This government has been more than happy to enable that. They won't deregister them. They got rid of the ABCC, they got rid of the tough cop on the beat, because the CFMEU donated so much to their last campaign that they have to be paid off. Our construction sector has paid the price for the absolute and utter failure of those opposite to deal with the thugs and the deep links to the criminal underworld that we see in the CFMEU. I noticed the member for Maribyrnong the other day making the point in his valedictory speech that perhaps there should have been more focus on the CFMEU historically. We take that point. But now there's a chance to do it, and those opposite have failed, as they have failed time and time again. We want to see more fairness for farmers and families, and the starting point to deliver that fairness is to get inflation down, which will allow the Reserve Bank to put downward pressure on interest rates and will allow Australians to see a restoration of their standard of living. It's pretty straightforward stuff. The 18.9 per cent increase in the cost of living for Australians is not something that there is any kind of pathway to a resolution to any time soon under this government. As I said, this bill is this government finally discovering that competition policy matters. As I said earlier, we introduced a stronger bill, which made sure there was a code in place for farmers where they would get fair treatment from those who they sell their goods to. That's something we've been wanting to see through this term. We've been constructive. We introduced it to the House and those opposite ignored it. We've also recognised that increasing the penalties for the wrong behaviour—for the misuse of market power by the supermarkets—is action that should be taken. We should have strong penalties if there is misuse of market power by a supermarket or, indeed, by a hardware chain—inappropriate behaviour towards customers or suppliers, on either side. Like other countries around the world, it's appropriate, in the most extreme of circumstances, that there be divestment powers to reduce the likelihood of that misuse of market power in the first place. The truth of the matter is that these laws already exist in the United States, they already exist in the UK. And they have been used sparingly—they should be used sparingly—in appropriate circumstances to ensure that there isn't misuse or abuse of market power. We do see in this country two supermarkets with around two-thirds of the market. There is always a risk with that kind of market share or market power that it will be misused. It's why we have introduced legislation to this place, to make sure that there is fairness in treatment towards farmers and families by supermarkets and hardware chains. It is absolutely essential that we do everything we can in this place to make sure there is fair treatment at all times of small businesses, of families, of farmers not only as suppliers to major corporates in Australia but also as customers. We know the single best regulator of any industry is a customer having competition and choice. They can regulate. We don't need to have thousands of people here in Canberra to do it if we have competition and well-informed consumers who are in a position to be able to make a choice. When they have that choice, and it's easy to switch, then they do if they're not getting the service they deserve. It's exactly the same on the supply side. It's good to see the Leader of the Nationals here because he knows that when farmers have choice and when they have competition for their goods, they're far more likely to get a good deal. They can regulate the behaviour of those who are buying their sheep or their cattle or their horticulture—whatever it is. They are in a better position to regulate the behaviour of that customer. Do you know how they do that? They choose. They switch. That's why we believe so strongly in competition policy and in fair competition, in particular, which is what our code is seeking to achieve. It's what the legislation that we introduced to the parliament is seeking to achieve. I do want to make a comment before I finish about the process whereby this legislation has been brought to the parliament. It is completely unacceptable that with little more than 24-hours warning that we see legislation in this place that we are supposed to digest and vote on in that kind of timeframe. It is absolutely appalling. The Prime Minister—this weak, arrogant Prime Minister—promised us a kinder, gentler parliament. The sun was going to shine in. But that means you've got to have time to consider new legislation and new bills. You have got to have time to be able to debate it internally, to debate and discuss it with stakeholders, but we're not getting any of that. We are being told to just accept it. That's the kind of arrogance we see from this government. We see it in the way they consult on new legislation as well. They get every stakeholder to sign an NDA. This is their latest thing—everyone has to sign a nondisclosure agreement so that, when we want to talk to our important stakeholders about a new initiative from this government, we can't. They come into our office and say, 'We can't talk about it.' How does democracy work with that kind of secrecy? How does democracy work when you shut things down? Is that what a kinder, fairer parliament is—one where you shut down stakeholders, you silence them and you prevent debate from occurring in this place in an appropriate way? That is what we see from this government. It is completely unacceptable and it's not possible for us, in this timeframe, to support this bill. 12:06 Mr LITTLEPROUD 265585 Maranoa I rise to support the shadow Treasurer on the opposition of this bill. I'll take you on a little bit of a history lesson, Deputy Speaker Buchholz. When we were in government we introduced the perishable goods inquiry by the ACCC. It gave us recommendations, back in 2021, that did not include divestiture powers. Subsequent to the election I wrote to the new incoming competition minister, who is here today, and gave him the opportunity to work collaboratively with the opposition to bring forward the statutory review of the code of conduct. The minister rejected that. That was in December 2022. He knows it, because the letter sits in his office. I'm prepared to table it to remind him that I offered him to bring forward that statutory review, which was due in October this year, to be done at the start of 2023. But so arrogant was this minister and so arrogant was the Prime Minister that they knew best—that, no, the market will sort it out and the supermarkets have it under control. He ignored the pleas to bring it forward despite the evidence that was being put in front of Australians every day. When we saw meat prices at the farm gate drop by 60 to 70 per cent, but only drop by eight to nine per cent at the check-out, I would have thought they might have taken our hand—even in June last year—and said, 'The Nats might have got this one right.' But, no, the hubris and arrogance continued. We have tried to work with this government in every way to give them an opportunity, and what we see today is not even the respect of an understanding of the gravity of the issue that families are facing around Australia tonight. There'll be families tonight, Minister, that won't be able to afford to put dinner on the table. In a country as rich as Australia, where we produce enough food and fibre for 80 million people, that we will have people who can't afford to put food on the table for their kids is not only an indictment on this government but also on this parliament for not coming together and getting a proper policy, a proper piece of regulatory framework, that actually changes culture. What has been introduced today isn't a bill that isn't in isolation of just addressing supermarkets. So little is the respect of those opposite of the understanding of the pain and hurt that families are feeling around this country, that they've shoved a whole lot of other stuff within this one bill. This competition minister obviously doesn't understand what families are doing despite the warnings that we gave him over 12 months ago to come and actually do something about this. He has now decided to put a whole lot of other measures within it. So what we're going to make sure that we do— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 230531 If the Leader of the Nationals could just take his seat, I give the call to the minister on a point of order. Dr Leigh BU8 Under standing order 66A, I ask whether the member would take a question—whether he's brave enough to do that? The DEPUTY SPEAKER 230531 The standing orders do provide for a question, but you can take it at any time during your presentation. Mr LITTLEPROUD 265585 I haven't finished with him yet, so I'm happy to put my record on the table as evidence. It became more and more evident that we were prepared to act. Then when the ACCC came back from our perishable goods it didn't ask for increased penalties; it asked for changes to consumer law and transition of markets and to make sure there was transparency. We put $5.4 million towards making sure that the transition happened, from the farm gate to the marketplace, so that there was that transparency. But then as evidence continued, as I was just articulating, in the meat industry we saw a 60 to 70 per cent reduction at the farm gate but only a eight to nine per cent reduction at the checkout. Something was not right. The supermarkets were gaming the system. You can look at horticulture until the cows come home. You can see the evidence that continued to come in around land banking—that they were using their property arms to muscle small and independent competitors out of marketplaces, taking away competition. That should have been a warning bell—that, in a cost-of-living crisis, when some Australians won't get to have dinner tonight, a government in touch with the people that they're purported to represent would have done something about it, but, no, they sat idly by. And then we see that even this bill, which has a whole lot of other measures in it, doesn't give respect to the gravity of the issue that we are facing here. The government have brought forward a piece of legislation that is effectively business as usual for the supermarkets. This basically says to the supermarkets, 'Continue on your merry way because the regulatory guardrails and the penalties that we'll put in place will do nothing to stop you from what you're currently doing.' The penalties that have been brought in place here include the infringement notices, which are a very important part to start with because they are what can change the culture of supermarkets. These are the speeding tickets the ACCC can give to make sure that the supermarkets understand that if they do the wrong thing there is a punitive penalty straight up. What the government is proposing is a maximum penalty on infringement notices of $187,800. They could go to a till down in one of their stores here in Civic, pull that out and pay that as a cost of doing business. That will not change culture. That is just business as usual. They can just cut the cheque and move on. What we have said in the bill that we introduced is that there will be a flat $2 million infringement notice. That changes culture. That changes the culture from the top down, when the CEOs know that the ACCC can walk in with a $2 million fine, and they will pay it, and it will be made public. The more egregious cases of the Customer and Consumer Competition Act are important, and we don't disagree about lifting the penalty to $10 million or 10 per cent of turnover. But, if you drill into this bill, there are very few occasions in which the court would be able to give that penalty. In fact, most of the penalties that a court could fine against most of the breaches cap out at $1 million. The ACCC will sit there with the resources and the costs of taking the supermarkets to court, who will no doubt end up in court—they will defend themselves—so is it really worth spending more than $1 million to get a maximum fine of $1 million? We've set a blanket: the infringements of these supermarkets are about, again, changing culture. That egregious penalty of $10 million, three per cent of the gain or five per cent of turnover is important but it should be used as a big stick. We also should have divestiture powers—divestiture powers that we hope we never use. In fact, we do have divestiture powers in this country; despite the Prime Minister standing in here and telling us it was some sort of Stalinist policy and that we were nationalising this supermarket market here in this country, in 2019 this parliament supported divestiture powers. In fact, the Prime Minister was in here when it was passed and supported it. He was prepared to take on the big energy CEOs to make sure that Australians had power, but he hasn't got the courage to stand up to the big two supermarket CEOs and say, 'I'm prepared to pull the lever on you,' when Australians tonight will struggle to put dinner on the table. Where is the Prime Minister? A prime minister should understand what Australians are going through in the cost-of-living crisis that has been created in this place by those opposite. Where is he in understanding what he has the ability to do and to change? Why wouldn't he stand up to the big two supermarkets, like we are prepared to, and change culture? Divestiture powers are in place in a number of countries around the world, and—do you know what?—the whole idea is that we never want to have to use them. That's the whole idea. That's why we come to this place and we set laws and we create penalties. Penalties act as deterrence. In a criminal sense, you could go to jail. In a corporate sense, it's about a punitive financial penalty that will change the culture of these companies where the evidence is clear that not only have they taken advantage of farmers—the suppliers—but they've also taken advantage of consumers. They've gamed the system and they've gamed to the market, and they've hurt both in that journey, and that's because they have market power. The big two supermarkets in this country control nearly 70 per cent of the grocery market. In the United States and the UK, the big three control about 30 to 40 per cent of the grocery market. The concentration is greater here. The need for a big deterrent is greater in Australia because of the concentration of market power that these big two supermarkets have. The opportunity was sitting in front of them. Instead, we have a bill that is putting in place penalties, which are being sold as big penalties, when, in fact, it is business as usual. What else did this government miss the opportunity to do. Despite us asking them to bring forward the timing of that statutory review on the compulsory grocery code, the government ignored us. We also made them an offer around a supermarket commissioner. We've put this in our submissions. This is important for suppliers and farmers in particular, because a farmer who feels that they are aggrieved in dealing with the supermarkets can come forward to a supermarket commissioner in a confidential manner. What we've heard inquiry after inquiry is that farmers fear retribution, because, when these supermarkets have nearly 70 per cent of the grocery market, they are the market. In my former life I was an agribusiness banker. I used to sit at farmers' kitchen tables lending money and I saw firsthand what these supermarkets did to farmers. There is a human toll on these people. In fact, I had to sell some of these people up because of the egregious behaviour of supermarkets. They started it with dairy. They devalued the dairy industry overnight by bringing in dollar-a-litre milk. They come in and they make contracts—promising contracts—available that get farmers to go and expend capital to significant levels, but there are loopholes within these contracts that allow them to get out of them and to reduce the price to a level where the farmers are gone. I've seen that. I have sat at a farmer's kitchen table and I've had that hard conversation. I haven't hidden. I've sat there and I've had to have that hard conversation. I can tell you that it's one of the worst things you can do in your life. Farmers fear retribution when they come forward, and I've seen where they've come forward and made complaints and the supermarkets have then cut their supply. They then don't have anywhere to sell, because the supermarkets control the market. We need to have an intermediary, one that can sit there and work with the farmer and understand whether they have a case to prosecute. What our supermarket commissioner will do, most importantly, is give that farmer choice. It will give them the opportunity to conciliate with the supermarket, if they feel they can trust the supermarket. If they don't—and I suspect that in most cases they won't—then it will give the supermarket commissioner the ability, after having validated that complaint, to escalate the complaint to the ACCC for investigation and to use powers of audit from the ACCC to open up the books of not just one of the big supermarkets but also other producers so that the confidentiality of the complainant is held and they don't fear retribution. That would bring confidence back to the market. That would bring fairness back to the market. We don't want to fix prices. We're simply saying that there should be fair, transparent prices from the farm gate to your plate. That is a simple principle that has not been respected by these supermarkets. They have gamed the fact that, if there has been a drop in price at the farm gate, you haven't seen that at the checkout. All we're saying is that, if the farm-gate price drops, you should see a commensurate drop at the checkout in a commensurate period of time. If it goes up at the farm gate, you should see a commensurate rise at the checkout. That's fairness. That's all we have tried to do. But, when you have a minister and a government that have from the very start ignored this issue about what that framework should look like, this is why Australians are hurting. This isn't the silver bullet to solve the cost-of-living crisis; this is one of a suite of measures that will just bring some fairness back to farmers and back to consumers. That's the Australian way. The Prime Minister said, 'No-one held back, no-one left behind.' Well, we've all been held back and left behind, because he hasn't had the courage to take on those in this country that are making it tougher for Australians to even eat. So this is a bill that shows absolute disdain and contempt for Australian farmers and consumers, because this is business as usual from a Prime Minister who is out of touch with what's happening outside these four walls and with the pain and the hurt that families are feeling every day out there. Here we have a minister who ignored it all—although I think that he actually agrees with me but, because he doesn't have a factional alignment, he had to go quiet. We have a plan. We have a policy that'll work. You've got business as usual. In fact, you've done nothing, and you should be ashamed. 12:21 Dr HAINES 282335 Indi I rise to speak on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Fairer for Families and Farmers and Other Measures) Bill 2024, and it's not looking too fair to me, I must say. Before I really begin, I want to put on the record that what we've seen in this parliament today is not considered, calm legislation. What we've seen today is more akin to schoolies week, I've got to say, and I'm really unimpressed. But, given that I'm here and I'm trying my best to look at a bill that has been rapidly introduced to this House and that we're now having a guillotined debate on, there are a couple of things I really want to put on the record. One of them is that every person that I represent in the electorate of Indi wants to see more done to rein in the supermarket duopoly. The way everyday Australians are struggling at the checkout and putting items back into their supermarket trolleys because of the exorbitant costs that the supermarkets are imposing upon them is a disgrace. Coles and Woolworths collectively control two-thirds of the grocery sector and are amongst the most profitable supermarkets in the world, and this bill is going to do nothing to make a dent in that. I absolutely support stronger frameworks to put an end to the supermarkets' bad behaviour. I do, and I'm grateful to the minister for rapidly giving me a copy of his second reading speech and a quick briefing on the bill. But I want to see stronger reform, targeted at looking after farmers, consumers and suppliers. I note the member for Maranoa's speech just now. He spoke about $1 milk. Let me say, as the daughter of dairy farmers, that I know the impact of that kind of egregious behaviour of supermarkets on hardworking family farmers. It's outrageous. I'm calling on the government to bring in economy-wide divestiture powers. We absolutely need those. Again, the member for Maranoa talked about this as a last-resort big stick, but it's the kind of big stick we need. The big supermarkets are never going to look after us. Of course they're not. We need something tough to give the competition regulator the power to break up big businesses when it can prove that regular Australians like all of those people that we represent are getting a dud deal—and they are getting an absolutely dud deal. I'm really disappointed that this bill is not going to fix this dud deal, because I would say that corporate interests should never be prioritised over consumer interests in a sector as important as food and groceries. We're not talking about discretionary items here; we're talking about tonight 's dinner or tomorrow's school lunch. Again, we have had no time to consider this, but I am really sorry to see that this bill, on the face of it, really appears to be a bandaid solution and it's not going to be the bold reform that Australians are asking us for. I'm a regional Independent. I represent the farming community in my electorate of Indi, including many, many suppliers: cherry growers, beef farmers, horticulturalists more broadly, grain croppers and multigenerational farming families. They're the kind of people that absolutely are the bedrock, underpinning the food security of our nation, and they're never going to get a fairer deal with this kind of legislation. I'm always going to push for a fairer food system in this country in which farmers, all our incredible primary producers and agricultural communities more broadly are supported, not undermined. I say to the government: do better on all accounts this week—and today especially—and do better on reining in these big supermarkets. 12:25 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina As an amendment to the motion for the second reading, I move: That 'now' be omitted with a view to substituting the word 'not'. Labor, as always, is late to the party on this. We're on the last day of the scheduled sittings for 2024, and Labor comes into this place, having promised pre the election in May 2022 that they would be a fairer, better government with more transparency and all the rest when it came to parliamentary procedure. Disappointingly—unbelievably!—what do they do on the last scheduled sitting day for this year and, potentially, this term? They bring in rushed legislation. They don't allow the opposition time to go through the legislation. They don't give the opposition time to consider it through the normal processes, such as backbench committees, joint party rooms and party rooms. This is exactly what Labor said it would not do, but here they are, bringing in this legislation and putting a fancy title on it: Treasury Laws Amendment (Fairer for Families and Farmers and Other Measures) Bill 2024, like it couldn't possibly be rejected. Fairer for families and farmers—we'll wait and see. If there has ever been a government in this nation that has been more unfair to families and more unfair to farmers, it is this government. On this government's watch we have seen prices go through the roof. We have seen household energy bills soaring. Just yesterday, on a mild day with temperatures hovering around 30 degrees in Sydney, we had power outages in Wagga Wagga affecting thousands of households and thousands of farmers. We had a blackout, and we saw the NSW Premier Chris Minns say, 'Turn off your pool pumps, turn off your washing machines, turn off your appliances, turn off your dishwashers.' It's not even summer yet. It wasn't even hot yesterday, yet they're blaming a heatwave. No—we need to blame Labor's rush to renewables. That rush to renewables is affecting the prices that households are paying for their energy. Government members interjecting— Mr McCORMACK 219646 Listen to them go! May Hansard record the protest by those opposite. There are only three of them, and they're very noisy. This is a— Dr Leigh BU8 Talk about farmers. Mr McCORMACK 219646 I'll talk about farmers, don't worry. I don't think the member for Fenner has ever come across a farmer or met a farmer. I'm not sure he's got too many farmers in his suburban Canberra electorate. Dr Leigh BU8 Absolutely. Mr McCORMACK 219646 Good on him. He's a decent sort of fellow, but he brings this legislation into this House knowing full well that Labor has been very unfair on farmers and families that they purport to represent. They have been very unfair on those people they said they would look after—and we know they are not. The coalition has been calling for stronger competition in our supermarket sector for more than two years. We introduced legislation. On 4 November 2024, we introduced the Food and Grocery (Mandatory) Code of Conduct Bill 2024 to this House. We wanted to see a better deal for our farmers. You've just heard the Nationals leader, the shadow agricultural minister, talking about having a supermarket commissioner and how it would be fairer for our farmers. Yet what does Labor do? The Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury just might represent one or two farmers. I appreciate that he claims he went to an agricultural college, and good luck to him, but did he listen when those teachers were saying that you need to be fair in your adult life? I know he's written plenty of books. Again, good on him. I know one of his books is even a top seller in Australia, and good on him for that. But what he shouldn't do is bring in legislation in the death throes of this parliament and expect to have them rammed through the House of Representatives in next to no time without proper consideration. Here we have a Labor government which, when talking to stakeholders, is forcing them—putting one arm behind the stakeholder's back while they virtually hold the signing hand with the other—and demanding nondisclosure agreements. That's so stakeholders can't oppose, comment on or discuss certain bits of certain legislation. That is so undemocratic, and so is this. Our plan includes the following: making the Food and Grocery Code of Conduct mandatory for retailers and wholesalers in the supermarket sector with an annual turnover of more than $5 billion and having higher penalties for breaches of the code up to $10 million, which is three times the value of the benefit obtained from a contravention. I've spoken to consumer advocate Luke Mackenzie about this very regularly. Farmers are too frightened to take on the big supermarkets, because, if they do, their supply gets cut off. If they do, their contracts get torn up. If they do, they don't get any more business. I appreciate that the supermarkets do, in certain circumstances, give the opportunity for national exposure and national sales of products from our farmers, who are, as I've always said, the best stewards of the environment in our country, who grow the best food and fibre in all of the world. Mr Birrell 288713 Hear, hear! Mr McCORMACK 219646 I hear 'hear, hear' from the member for Nicholls, and he would know. His area around Shepparton and the Goulburn-Murray Valley area grows some of the finest, freshest food, just like the Riverina and the member for New England's electorate. They grow the best food in all the world—enough to feed 80 million people. In addition, where a court can't determine a contravention, there will be 10 per cent of annual turnover in those higher penalties, with infringement notices of $2 million, there will be 10 per cent of annual turnover in those higher penalties, giving powers to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission to audit the retailers and wholesalers to ensure they are dealing with suppliers lawfully, in good faith and fairly. There's that word again: 'fairly'. That's something that Labor should adhere and perhaps look up in the dictionary. They are complying with the code. They should create a supermarket commissioner, as I mentioned earlier, to act as a confidential avenue for farmers and suppliers as well as introduce sector-specific divestiture powers as a last resort to address the behaviour of supermarkets and put an end to supermarket price gouging. If ever we needed such legislation, it is right now, because people are hurting. People cannot afford the grocery prices that they are encountering when they go to the supermarket. Why? It's because Labor spent the first months and months of the 47th parliament worrying about a divisive referendum. You may well laugh about this, Minister, but this is the fact. It did nothing to sort out the cost-of-living crisis, pressures and hurt that people were already experiencing because of the Labor government coming into power and office. Real wages are not going up; real wages are coming decisively down. Yes, people might have higher wages, but the cost-of-living is taking all of that up and then much more besides. Don't take my word for it; go and talk to a farmer or worker. Go and see how they are hurting. If real wages are going up, why are people pitching tents along riverbanks in country communities and hooking into the council-provided power supplies at tourist parks et cetera and living in cars? Why is the homeless rate up? People are hurting. It's ordinary, everyday Australians who are worried about how they're going to put gifts under their Christmas trees this year. It's ordinary, everyday Australians who, every time they go and fill up at the bowser, are paying more and more for their petrol and their fuel. It's ordinary, everyday Australians who simply can't afford groceries. And what do we have? In New South Wales yesterday, we had the Premier telling people to turn off their appliances, simply because he didn't want more blackouts as a result of the supposed heatwave—which was a complete folly—that was affecting the power load right across the state. This is the thin edge of the wedge, because, if that was happening yesterday, what on earth is going to happen when it does become hot and we get those temperatures in the mid-30s that we normally get—usually get, inevitably get, invariably get, always get—every summer? It's not climate change; it's just the fact that our summers are hot. Yet they will blame climate change. It is not; it is the fact that our summers are always hot—always have been, always will be—and that we live in a country of droughts and flooding rains and fires. And we now live in a country where there is a cost-of-living crisis, and it should not be so. We grow the best food in all of the world—the best, the cleanest, the freshest, the greenest—and what does this government do? No sooner had they lost the referendum—that divisive referendum on the Voice—than they started putting in taxes like the truckies tax. They started putting in taxes on farmers, getting them to pay for the biosecurity of products that come in from overseas and compete on the shelves of the supermarkets of Australia. Our farmers are affected by this. This is nonsense, yet this is what Labor is doing. They are not the farmers' friend. They are not being fair to families. They are not being fair to farmers. This is a diabolical situation, and what do we see on the last day of parliament? They're just trying to ram this legislation through and trying to guillotine debate. Only yesterday we saw the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024 put in this place. Yes, I voted in support of it and, yes, so did Labor. Dr Leigh BU8 Are you going to vote for this bill? Mr McCORMACK 219646 I'm not. What we saw yesterday was Labor talking up a bill that was so imperative that it needed to happen and be pushed through, but hardly any Labor members spoke on the bill. They only speak on bills when the Labor 'dirt unit' sends them in here with the notes and tells them to do just that. Mr McCORMACK 219646 You might laugh, but it's true, because they all stand at the microphone with their notes and just read them diligently like they have to. They can't even think for themselves. This bill has to be opposed. This bill is bad. That is why my amendment needs to be followed, needs to be adopted and needs to be taken up. We have not had time to consider Labor's rushed policies and Labor's rushed bill. They're just trying to tidy everything up so they can get to Christmas and pretend there's nothing to see here, then call an election early next year. Well, the punters are onto them; the voters are onto them. They know that this government has not been fair to families, they know this government has not been fair to household budgets, and they certainly know in rural, regional and remote Australia that this government has not been fair to farmers. It is just too little too late. It's a bandaid measure by a terrible government—one that has been terrible for Australia—that, in its dying days, is desperate just to push through legislation. Australians are struggling with a cost-of-living crisis, and it is out of control. People do not know how they are going to make ends meet. They do not know how they're going to pay their rent, how they're going to pay their mortgage, how they're going to pay for their groceries, or how they're going to pay for Christmas gifts this December. The government has been too slow to act on competition policy—it has—not just in the supermarket sector but right across the economy. We've seen it with the news bargaining code, we've seen it with consumer data rights, and we've seen it in the serious cartel allegations against—wait for it—the CFMEU. It's alright though, John Setka's going out—he's apparently got PTSD. He'll probably get a big pay out too. Labor's friend, the CFMEU— Mr McCORMACK 219646 Well, yes, Labor's friend because Labor takes donation after donation. Mr Giles 243609 We kicked him out. What did you do? Mr McCORMACK 219646 You didn't have the guts, like Bob Hawke did with the Builders Labourers Federation, to deregister the union. That should have been the first order of business. A tough prime minister like Bob Hawke would have done that—did do that back in the day—but not this mob. The coalition has led the way on this since the start of the term and our package of bills that we introduced weeks ago is the outcome of that work. Led by the Nationals leader, led by the Nationals, led by the coalition, and that's what we do. Our approach has been fair, has been right, has been proper, not like this unfair for families and farmers bill. I urge for my amendment to be adopted. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 74046 Is the amendment seconded? Mr Joyce e5d The amendment is seconded. I stand here— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 74046 I call the honourable minister. 12:40 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fenner I move: That the question be now put. The SPEAKER 53517 The question is that the question be put.    

The House divided. [12:46]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

 74 AYES Aly, A. Ananda-Rajah, M. Bates, S. J. Belyea, J. A. Bowen, C. E. Burke, A. S. Burnell, M. P. Burney, L. J. Burns, J. Butler, M. C. Byrnes, A. J. Chandler-Mather, M. Charlton, A. H. G. Chesters, L. M. Clare, J. D. Claydon, S. C. Coker, E. A. Collins, J. M. Conroy, P. M. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. 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. Lawrence, T. N. Laxale, J. A. A. Leigh, A. K. Lim, S. B. C. 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'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. Scrymgour, M. R. Shorten, W. R. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Vamvakinou, M. Watson-Brown, E. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. Wilson, J. H. Zappia, A. 54 NOES Andrews, K. L. Archer, B. K. Bell, A. M. Birrell, S. J. Boyce, C. E. Buchholz, S. Caldwell, C. M. Chaney, K. E. Chester, D. J. Coleman, D. B. Conaghan, P. J. Coulton, M. M. (Teller) Dutton, P. C. Entsch, W. G. Fletcher, P. W. Gee, A. R. 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. O'Brien, L. S. Pearce, G. B. Pike, H. J. Pitt, K. J. Price, M. L. Ramsey, R. E. (Teller) Sharkie, R. C. C. Steggall, Z. Stevens, J. Sukkar, M. S. Taylor, A. J. Tehan, D. T. Thompson, P. van Manen, A. J. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Ware, J. L. Webster, A. E. Willcox, A. J. Wilson, R. J. Wolahan, K. 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

12:49 The SPEAKER 53517 We've now dealt with the issue of the second reading and that question being put. I will put the question before the House that the bill be read a second time. The difficulty is the question was never stated before the House. It was moved and it was seconded. The SPEAKER 53517 I'm aware, member for New England. The question now is that the bill be read a second time. On the amendment moved by the member for Riverina, the difficulty is that that question was never stated before the House. It was moved and seconded, but the question was not stated. We just resolved the question that had been stated before the House, which was that the question be put on the second reading. You can appreciate the position I'm in. The question before the House is that the bill be read a second time.    

The House divided. [12:54]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

78 AYES Aly, A. Ananda-Rajah, M. Bandt, A. P. Bates, S. J. Belyea, J. A. Bowen, C. E. Burke, A. S. Burnell, M. P. Burney, L. J. Burns, J. Butler, M. C. Byrnes, A. J. Chandler-Mather, M. Charlton, A. H. G. Chesters, L. M. Clare, J. D. Claydon, S. C. Coker, E. A. Collins, J. M. Conroy, P. M. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. 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. 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'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. Scrymgour, M. R. Sharkie, R. C. C. Shorten, W. R. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Steggall, Z. Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Vamvakinou, M. Watson-Brown, E. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. Wilson, J. H. Zappia, A. 56 NOES Andrews, K. L. Archer, B. K. Bell, A. M. Birrell, S. J. Boyce, C. E. Buchholz, S. Caldwell, C. M. Chester, D. J. Coleman, D. B. Conaghan, P. J. Coulton, M. M. (Teller) Daniel, Z. Entsch, W. G. Fletcher, P. W. Gee, A. R. 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. O'Brien, L. S. Pearce, G. B. Pike, H. J. Pitt, K. J. Price, M. L. Ramsey, R. E. (Teller) Ryan, M. M. Spender, A. M. Stevens, J. Sukkar, M. S. Taylor, A. J. Tehan, D. T. Thompson, P. Tink, K. J. van Manen, A. J. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Ware, J. L. Webster, A. E. Wilkie, A. D. Willcox, A. J. Wilson, R. J. Wolahan, K. Young, T. J. 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.
Bill read a second time.
Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced.
(In division) Ms Spender interjecting—

 12:56 The SPEAKER 53517 We shall reflect the tally to ensure that members who are not participating in the division are indicated as such. The result of the division is ayes 78, noes 53. Third Reading 38 12:58 The SPEAKER 53517 Is leave granted for the third reading to be moved immediately? Mr Joyce e5d Leave is granted. Honourable members interjecting — Ms Bell 282981 Leave is not granted. The SPEAKER 53517 We're going to recommit this. We're going to go through the process one by one to get it right. Is leave granted for the third reading to be moved immediately? Mr Joyce e5d No, it's not. 12:59 Mr BURKE DYW Watson From the contingency motion, I move: That so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent the motion for the third reading being moved without delay. The SPEAKER 53517 I will explain to the House what the Leader of the House has moved. On page 6 of today's Notice Paper, it says: Contingent on the second reading of a bill being agreed to and the Speaker having announced any message from the Governor General under standing order 147: Minister to move—That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the motion for the third reading being moved without delay. The question is the motion moved by the Leader of the House be agreed to.    

The House divided. [13:05]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

 77 AYES Aly, A. Ananda-Rajah, M. Bandt, A. P. Bates, S. J. Belyea, J. A. Bowen, C. E. Burke, A. S. Burnell, M. P. Burney, L. J. Burns, J. Butler, M. C. Byrnes, A. J. Chandler-Mather, M. Charlton, A. H. G. Chesters, L. M. Clare, J. D. Claydon, S. C. Coker, E. A. Collins, J. M. Conroy, P. M. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. 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. 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'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. Scrymgour, M. R. Shorten, W. R. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Steggall, Z. Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Vamvakinou, M. Watson-Brown, E. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. Wilson, J. H. Zappia, A. 58 NOES Andrews, K. L. Archer, B. K. Bell, A. M. Birrell, S. J. Boyce, C. E. Buchholz, S. Caldwell, C. M. Chaney, K. E. Chester, D. J. Coleman, D. B. Conaghan, P. J. Coulton, M. M. (Teller) Daniel, Z. Entsch, W. G. Fletcher, P. W. Gee, A. R. 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. O'Brien, L. S. Pearce, G. B. Pike, H. J. Pitt, K. J. Price, M. L. Ramsey, R. E. (Teller) Ryan, M. M. Scamps, S. A. Sharkie, R. C. C. Spender, A. M. Stevens, J. Sukkar, M. S. Taylor, A. J. Thompson, P. Tink, K. J. van Manen, A. J. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Ware, J. L. Webster, A. E. Wilkie, A. D. Willcox, A. J. Wilson, R. J. Wolahan, K. Young, T. J. 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

13:06 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fenner I move: That the bill be now read a third time. The SPEAKER 53517 The question before the House is that the bill be read a third time.    

The House divided. [13:10]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

 77 AYES Aly, A. Ananda-Rajah, M. Bandt, A. P. Bates, S. J. Belyea, J. A. Bowen, C. E. Burke, A. S. Burnell, M. P. Burney, L. J. Burns, J. Butler, M. C. Byrnes, A. J. Chandler-Mather, M. Charlton, A. H. G. Chesters, L. M. Clare, J. D. Claydon, S. C. Coker, E. A. Collins, J. M. Conroy, P. M. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. 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. 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'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. Scrymgour, M. R. Shorten, W. R. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Steggall, Z. Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Vamvakinou, M. Watson-Brown, E. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. Wilson, J. H. Zappia, A. 53 NOES Andrews, K. L. Archer, B. K. Bell, A. M. Birrell, S. J. Boyce, C. E. Buchholz, S. Caldwell, C. M. Chester, D. J. Coleman, D. B. Conaghan, P. J. Coulton, M. M. (Teller) Entsch, W. G. Fletcher, P. W. Gee, A. R. 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. O'Brien, L. S. Pearce, G. B. Pike, H. J. Pitt, K. J. Price, M. L. Ramsey, R. E. (Teller) Sharkie, R. C. C. Stevens, J. Sukkar, M. S. Taylor, A. J. Thompson, P. Tink, K. J. van Manen, A. J. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Ware, J. L. Webster, A. E. Wilkie, A. D. Willcox, A. J. Wilson, R. J. Wolahan, K. Young, T. J. 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.
Bill read a third time.

Future Made in Australia (Production Tax Credits and Other Measures) Bill 2024 40

Future Made in Australia (Production Tax Credits and Other Measures) Bill 2024

Second Reading 40 13:11 Ms CHANEY 300006 Curtin In March this year, I moved a private member's motion calling on the government to increase Australia's international competitiveness for new energy industries, specifically by introducing production tax incentives. This motion was part of a long list of speeches and representations I've made, urging the government for a bold response to the United States Inflation Reduction Act. I've been worried that Australia is not acting fast enough or decisively enough to take advantage of the global transition to green energy. Today, I'm pleased to rise in support of the government's introduction of production tax incentives for hydrogen and critical minerals, which will support Australian industry in an increasingly competitive international market. I want to talk about why we need incentives like these, why production tax incentives are the way to go and what it means for the future of and critical minerals for Australia—specifically, WA. With decarbonisation, the global economy is shifting. After a transitional period, different countries will emerge as winners and losers, depending on their natural advantages and how nimbly they've responded to new opportunities. There's much discussion about Australia's natural advantages in a net zero global economy: our abundance of sun, wind and critical minerals. For example, Australia is one of the few countries in the world with all of the input minerals and materials required for lithium batteries. But we face a very real risk of remaining a country that digs and ships, rather than being a serious and competitive producer of new energy, unless we make sure that downstream processing projects are established onshore. We also need to build a more resilient and diversified economy, one that will not only thrive in a decarbonised world but also withstand shocks and financial disruptions, like those we suffered during the COVID-19 pandemic and, following that, the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East. Right now, Australia has poor economic complexity. Our economic complexity ranking has dropped 27 places since 2007. We rank 93 out of 133 countries, between Uganda and Pakistan. For comparison, some of the countries we normally see as our peers include Japan, which ranked first; the UK, eighth; and the US, 14th. According to Harvard's Atlas of Economic Complexity, Australia's low result is due to a lack of diversification of exports. If we want a strong, stable and prosperous economy, we need to diversify into decarbonised industries and production of more complex products that the world wants. The Inflation Reduction Act broke new ground with its A$1 trillion commitment to green and renewable energy. It was the most significant climate legislation in US history. Approximately two-thirds of this IRA budget is allocated to uncapped tax incentives for different stages of production within clean energy industries. These tax incentives deliver a deafeningly loud signal to investors that are considering doing new energy business in the US. While we don't know exactly what the future is for the US Inflation Reduction Act post-Trump, it is clear the race is on for countries to position themselves as leaders in the new energy economy. If President Trump does roll back some of the IRA incentives, it could actually be the opportunity we need to catch up. Investors are looking for reasons to choose Australia over other countries. Companies are actively looking to develop and grow their renewables operations in Australia, but they need this government to give them tangible confirmation of Australia's energy transition vision and give them the confidence and certainty that Australia will welcome and incentive the new energy opportunities currently knocking on our door. In the US, the manufacturing of batteries, solar panels and wind turbines, as well as the processing of critical minerals, attracts production tax incentives, as well as further bonus tax credits for components made in the US. The US package also has committed tax credits for any investments in zero emissions electricity generation facilities or energy storage technology. The Smart Energy Council here in Australia has reported that, due to the attractive US incentives, many of its member companies are moving their facilities to the US or proactively considering how to access IRA incentives. With Australian production costs already 10 per cent higher than the US, it's essential that the government provides a clear signal that Australia is ready and willing to invest in value-adding downstream projects. We have all the natural resources for this to make sense, but, if other countries beat us to build the infrastructure, it will be too late. Production tax incentives are a proven mechanism that means you pay less tax when you actually produce something. The way productive tax incentives usual work is to attach the credit to phases of manufacturing and production for a set period. Independent research from Mandala Partners found that the key driver for financial close for downstream projects is incentives that help mitigate total operating costs throughout production cycles—not loans and not upfront grants but long-term embedded incentives that encourage advantages and production. Instead of money paid upfront for something that may or may not become tangible, production tax incentives are payable only when you deliver, so taxpayers are paying for results. The hydrogen production tax incentive in this bill is intended to bring forward project development, make renewable hydrogen available sooner and build scale to reduce production costs over time. It will be delivered through Australia's tax system as a refundable tax offset providing a $2 per kilogram incentive for renewable hydrogen to eligible producers for up to 10 years, finishing in 2040. The CSIRO recognises that green hydrogen is likely to play a significant role in a net zero global energy economy, with the potential to avoid approximately one-third of Australia's current fossil fuel emissions by 2050. Under the government's National Hydrogen Strategy, published earlier this year, green hydrogen manufactured in upcoming hydrogen hubs operating with reduced production costs will complement other renewable energy sources identified under the climate change bill. But hydrogen still faces significant hurdles. Its current high production costs, at $5 to $6 per kilogram, must fall to about $2 per kilogram in order to become commercially viable. This should happen over time with technological innovation and renewable prices decreasing. For many hard to abate industries like steelmaking, shipping and aviation, hydrogen is the most promising prospect for decarbonisation, but it's not yet competitively priced. This production tax incentive for hydrogen is a step in the right direction. Ultimately, hydrogen will get there, but we need to make sure we are in the race by the time it does. Many other countries are competing to be leaders in hydrogen. Critical minerals such as lithium, nickel, cobalt, silicon and rare earth elements are essential components in many rapidly growing clean energy technologies. They're critical because they can't be easily or cost effectively substituted. This bill targets critical minerals by introducing the CMPTI, with eligible entities able to claim up to 10 per cent of their eligible expenditure for the processing and refining of critical minerals for a maximum 10-year period. This will be delivered in the form of a refundable offset similar to that proposed to hydrogen. Analysis by Mandala Partners estimates that the economic benefit of supported downstream processing of critical minerals could represent up to $2.4 billion in Australia's economy by 2035. Western Australia, my home state, accounts for around half of global lithium production and is a major exporter of nickel, cobalt, manganese and rare-earth elements. This government has already put nickel on the official Critical Minerals List and in February announced a 50 per cent royalty discount for 18 months, to address serious competition in that market, which was a positive step. It's essential that we accelerate opportunities in WA's critical minerals sector and capitalise now on the position that critical and battery minerals will play in decarbonising the global economy. The final component of this legislation affords Indigenous Business Australia greater powers to borrow and raise money by reducing barriers on investment partners, both Commonwealth and private. This modernisation of IBA's borrowing powers provides flexibility so that IBA can play a bigger role in supporting and promoting First Nations economic self-determination. The Joint Standing Committee on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs, of which I'm a member, recently concluded our inquiry into economic self-determination and opportunities for First Nations Australians. Recommendation 8 of that report, which was tabled yesterday, was: … that the Australian Government strengthen existing, and develop new, instruments to enhance and fast track Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples' access to finance and capital. I commend the government's responsiveness to the joint standing committee regarding this matter, as a first step. Before I conclude, I would like to make a comment about the Leader of the Opposition's stance on this bill. When the production tax incentives were announced in the budget, the Leader of the Opposition went running to the media, declaring that the incentives were 'tax cuts for billionaires' and vowing to repeal the bill if elected. This statement put him at odds with the WA Liberal Party. The WA Liberals are in favour of this bill because it's good for WA. I'm baffled as to how the Leader of the Opposition, who purports to be a champion of business and good economic management, would oppose an incentive that's designed to increase investment and innovation in Australia. Funding production tax incentives for critical minerals and hydrogen will be good for WA, as we encourage investment and add value and green energy to our natural resources, and, by extension, that's also good for Australia. In conclusion, I'm pleased to see a production tax incentives approach taken here. It means incentives are only paid once something is produced, it gives certainty to emerging industries, it ensures that we can make the most of our natural resources and it positions us as a long-term leader in a net zero economy. I commend the bill to the House. 13:22 Mr VIOLI 300147 Casey This bill, the Future Made in Australia (Production Tax Credits and Other Measures) Bill 2024, like so many of the government's bills, follows the standard procedure. It's just like, 'It must be another day that ends in Y—we've got a bill with a really impressive name.' Of course everyone backs a future made in Australia, but, when you look at the detail, it doesn't stack up. This bill also highlights one of the fatal flaws of the Albanese Labor government. The Albanese Labor government are obsessed with picking winners—picking their favourites, like PsiQuantum, the Silicon Valley based company which they put under the Future Made in Australia banner—instead of focusing on raising all boats with a rising tide and making decisions to get the key economic indicators right. They're focused on tax credits in the 2030s, which probably won't even make a difference. Let's chat to Twiggy Forrest about that; he's pulling out of green hydrogen. When they focus on this issue of picking winners and they're distracted, there are real-world consequences. I want to share a letter from Cathy at Discovery Community Care in my community. She wrote to me, so frustrated with this government. I want to read her words, as they need to be heard: 'Towards the end of 2023, we noticed a significant shift in those reaching out for food support. It was no longer only those who were unemployed or experiencing homelessness or struggling with mental health challenges. The biggest demographic shift was now those working. But they cannot make ends meet. The 'working poor' category has been the biggest growth demographic for us in 2024. We are now helping more families, whereas, historically, our households may have represented predominantly singles or smaller households. We now have, on average, a hundred people walking through our doors each week, which equates to 586 people in households. We have grown by 400 per cent since March 2024. The recent funding offered by the government for food relief has landed with OzHarvest, SecondBite and the large organisations, which I'm sure they need also. However, the organisations at the grassroots level, who are at the coalface, interacting with the people, putting food on the tables for families and giving hundreds of thousands of unpaid hours to make this possible, also need funding that doesn't require us to jump through hoops and give copious hours to do so, only to often be overlooked for the bigger activities when we are already time poor.' This is an example of the struggles of my community, which the Treasurer and the Prime Minister seem immune to. They're focused on tax credits and anything but helping the Australian people. To make it worse for Cathy and our community, the program of government funding that she referred to was $14 million that the government put out into the community to help those in need, and, when we look at the priorities of the government, we see that, at exactly the same time that they committed that $14 million, they also committed $40 million to sell the stage 3 tax cuts—$40 million to sell something that didn't need to be sold, and $14 million to help food relief centres. I wonder and worry, as they rush this bill through today, about how much they are going to spend to sell these Future Made in Australia production tax credits, which are not going to help anyone in Casey or make any difference to the challenges the Australian people face. When we understand everything under the Future Made in Australia banner and we look at it holistically, there is an important point we need to understand: it's picking winners. I mentioned PsiQuantum, and I want to again talk about PsiQuantum as an example and talk about the process that PsiQuantum went through, because the Australian people need to understand that every part of the flawed process undertaken in relation to PsiQuantum, one of the first projects under this Future Made in Australia banner, has a cloud over it. We know that Minister Husic picked his favourite. He was sold on PsiQuantum in early 2023. He was so sold on it and had so much confidence that he clearly gave agreements to PsiQuantum that they were going to get the money that they required, because PsiQuantum were out in the investor community sending emails and confirming their advanced negotiations with the Australian government. They were talking to venture capitalists and other investors, trying to get more money for PsiQuantum off the back of the agreement and the advanced negotiations they had with the Australian people. There's a big problem with the timing of this. They were telling people in July of 2023 about the advanced negotiations and agreement they had. The problem for the minister, which he has still not addressed, is that the independent EOI process that he loves to talk about actually started in August of 2023. So we've got taxpayer money, all under the Future Made in Australia banner, which really should be rebranded 'future made in Silicon Valley', because that's where the head office of PsiQuantum is. PsiQuantum were telling people, 'We've got money,' before a supposedly independent EOI process was underway. So how can the Australian people trust anything this government says when it comes to Future Made in Australia? They can't. This is the problem. The outcome is predetermined. Lobbyists were lining up to see the Minister for Industry and Science and the Treasurer to get their support, because, if you get the support of the government, you get the red carpet, and, if you're a business trying to go about your best life to create economic opportunities for your community, you're abandoned. But it's even better than that. The Prime Minister, when asked about it, said: There's first mover advantage in areas such as this and Australia can't afford to sit back and watch other countries get ahead of us in an area where we have this enormous opportunity. The problem with that for the Prime Minister is that, at the same time that we gave a billion dollars of taxpayer money, the US state of Illinois gave PsiQuantum $760 million to build the same computer in the state of Illinois, in Chicago, so we're not even getting the first-mover advantage. It feels very much like the Simpsons episode with the monorail. They sold the monorail to the community as a great opportunity. Minister Husic got sold on the monorail from PsiQuantum. He disregarded process. He disregarded taxpayer money. He went all in on this one company, and it completely undermines the process of any bill under Future Made in Australia, because how do we know that other organisations have not been able to lobby successfully? How do we know, for those industries that are going to get these tax credits, what work they have done— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 74046 Order! It being 1.30 pm, the debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour. STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS 43 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Sturt Electorate: Community Events 43 13:30 Mr STEVENS 176304 Sturt As all members know, it can be difficult at times juggling our commitments here in Canberra with the various community events of which we all like to try and attend as many as possible. Last weekend, the stars really did align for me to go to three excellent events in the brief time that I was back home in my electorate between Friday and Sunday. I'd like to thank, firstly, my local Indian community, who had a lovely Diwali dinner at the Chennai Palace Restaurant on North East Road in Holden Hill in my electorate. It was great to go and spend a lovely evening with them on Friday night. Within 24 hours, I was again at the Payneham RSL for their Christmas supper event with the very impressive Rat Pack Tribute Band. I know a great night was had by all who attended. They're such a strong RSL that do great work working with, obviously, their members and veterans, but they also put on great events that so many people from the community come to and attend. The Annunciation Church, a Catholic church in Hectorville, had a lovely mass service on Sunday morning. Again, it was an honour to attend and be with that very large community at that milestone service that they held. It reminds us how lucky we are to be in this place representing communities with such great diversity. That was the excellent weekend I had with three of my great community groups between the last two sitting weeks. Physical and Sexual Harassment and Violence 44 13:31 Mr LAXALE 299174 Bennelong Gendered violence as a national tragedy that affects every corner of our society. No matter your wealth, race, class, age or background, it does not discriminate, and its impact reverberates through all communities. It robs individuals of their safety, their dignity and, in too many cases, their lives. This morning, Australian Femicide Watch, run by Sherele Moody, reported the deaths of Coral Seinor and Thelma Clausen in Western Australia. They are the 87th and 88th women to be killed by gendered violence in Australia this year. They represent much more than statistics. They are lives lost, futures stolen and families changed forever. Every woman has the right to live without fear—fear of violence, of being dismissed and of not being believed—yet, despite our progress as a nation, gendered violence persists. It's not enough to just say that this isn't okay. Every single one of us needs to step up. Today in Bennelong, my great friend and colleague Councillor Penny Pedersen led a march in Macquarie Park to campaign against gendered violence. She has been advancing this cause for years, fighting for all women and fighting for justice and dignity. Like her, we all want a society where everyone, no matter who they are, can live without fear. Gendered violence is not inevitable, but it's something that our society has accepted for too long. We need to call it out and reject it and build a society where women are safe from gendered violence. Australian Defence Force 44 13:33 Mr THOMPSON 281826 Herbert The Labor defence minister is failing the brave men and women of the Australian Defence Force. Just recently, soldiers from the 3rd Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment travelled to South Korea to participate, with 10 other nations, in Exercise Tiger Dingo. You would think they would have all the equipment and the gear that they need to represent us on the international stage. Well, you'd be wrong. They weren't issued cold-weather gear. They got told there isn't enough for them, so we had people who had to go buy their own. Others got a portion of funding to be able to do it. All in all, that's quite embarrassing that we can't even support our people on exercise. How are we supposed to do it in combat? If you look at what's happening in the special forces world, we've got dog restraints that you can use in New South Wales but that you can't use in Queensland or in Western Australia. They're not nationalised, so we're not training our people in country on how we'd do it overseas. We need our people to be able to train how they will fight. We need to make sure there's a national standard when it comes to supporting the Australian Defence Force. Whether you're an MP, an engineer with a dog or a dog handler in the special forces world, we should all have the same rules. Instead, we have a defence minister more worried about the back nine and his handicap on the golf course. We need a minister that stands up for the ADF. Pakistan 44 13:34 Ms VAMVAKINOU 00AMT Calwell On 26 November, Pakistani security forces launched a midnight operation against unarmed peaceful PTI protesters in Islamabad resulting in what has been described as a massacre. About 100,000 PTI supporters were peacefully protesting and calling for accountability for election rigging, the immediate release of political prisoners, the restoration of democracy and the rule of law and the reversal of authoritarian amendments and military overreach in Pakistan. Using live ammunition and excessive force, security forces attacked violently, with unofficial sources suggesting over 400 deaths and countless injuries. The political situation in Pakistan continues to be critical since the ousting of former prime minister Imran Khan in April 2022 and following an assassination attempt in November 2022. Imran Khan remains incarcerated on what are described as politically motivated charges as the military led regime continues to crush the people's dissent by launching a systemic crackdown on workers and leaders of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf party. In the 2024 general election, on 4 February, despite attempts by the electoral commission to hinder the PTI by stripping its election symbol, the bat, it went on to receive a landslide victory, a testament to its mass support. Calwell is home to a large Pakistani Australian community, who have again raised their concerns regarding the deterioration of democracy in Pakistan. The PTI's Australian chapter calls on this parliament to condemn Pakistan's state sanctioned repression which has led to the Islamabad massacre and to urge for the restoration of democracy. (Time expired) Cost of Living 45 13:36 Mr BATES 300246 Brisbane Big corporations are making billions in profits while everyone else is struggling. Millions of people across this country are struggling to keep their heads above water, and no corporation should hoard billions of profits while three million people are in poverty. We need to stop big corporations from ripping people off so we can fund real cost-of-living relief for all of us. Norway properly taxes the profits of oil and gas corporations to pay for universal education, health care and services that benefit everyone. There are examples around the world and even in Australia's own past of bold actions that have improved people's lives. Band-aid solutions just don't cut it. People know a better world is possible and, as we struggle through this cost-of-living crisis, they know the only barrier to help now is the political one. We can't keep voting for the same two parties who take millions in donations from the big corporations fuelling these problems and expect different results. If we properly taxed these fossil fuel giants and multinational corporations, we could afford to improve everyone's lives. Bringing dental and mental health care into Medicare, making uni and TAFE free again and building 100 per cent publicly owned renewable power to bring down electricity bills—this is all possible if we have a government that's actually willing to be bold. The best way to keep out the Liberal and National parties and to stop the rise of the far right in this country and across the world is to implement policies that tackle big corporate interests and make the economy work for everyone again, not just those at the top. The two-party system must end. (Time expired) Bean Electorate: Early Childhood Education 45 13:37 Mr DAVID SMITH 276714 Bean Hundreds of families in my electorate of Bean and families right through the ACT rely on early education operators to provide professionally-run centres. Early education is absolutely essential to the first steps for children. It is also a building block for many, especially women, to participate fully in the workforce. That's why I find the representations I've received from local families about poor experiences with the new operator in the Bean electorate so alarming. Families have reported that in times gone by their local centre in Gowrie met their needs and upheld high standards of care. However, earlier this year a new operator, Genius, took over and serious problems have followed. This includes reports of staff not being paid on time, a number of staff leaving, the standard of gardening, cleaning and building maintenance declining and poor communication with families. This has resulted in many families feeling the need to leave the Gowrie centre. These reports are of concern not only to the families whose children still attend the centre but for all others who are connected to the centres run by the same operator throughout the ACT. I'm pleased to join with other ACT representatives and lend my voice to the call for the operator to get its act together. I also believe and will continue to advocate that all bodies with regulatory responsibilities in this space must take all appropriate steps to ensure the rights of staff, children and families are upheld. Curtin Electorate 45 13:39 Ms CHANEY 300006 Curtin As the parliamentary year draws to a close, my thoughts turn to home and the power of the Curtin community. Almost three years ago, my community asked me to run for a seat in parliament and, in turn, I asked my community to get involved. Every week, for almost three years, they have stepped up. I want to thank my community for their engagement, which has directly shaped how I speak and how I vote. We've held 19 policy events on topics like housing, aged care, the cost of living and electrification. We've made eight community submissions on topics like fuel efficiency, plastics, online safety, transport and housing. We have community catch-ups every month and Canberra debriefs after each sitting week. My youth advisory group is an awesome team of committed and passionate 16-year-olds who are ready to make their voices heard. They're not just talking about the future; they're helping me shape it. Curtin's involvement allows me to treat every vote as a conscience vote. It allows me to change my vote in response to community opinion. No servant of a major party can do that. My community wants a better democracy, and this year again they got involved. So thank you, Curtin. It might have been my name on the annoying campaign posters, but it's been your voice in parliament. Liberal-National Coalition 46 13:40 Mr REPACHOLI 298840 Hunter Right now our country needs progress and fairness, but the opposition are standing in the way, threatening the good work we've done together. Take education and skills. They've called fee-free TAFE wasteful spending. That's an insult to the hardworking Australians learning new skills to build better lives and grow our economy. We're investing in TAFE to support workers and industries, and they are planning to make cuts and take these opportunities away. Then there's fairness at work. Our same job, same pay reforms make sure workers are getting paid properly, closing the labour hire loopholes that let big businesses take advantage of the hardworking Australians, but those opposite want to scrap these changes and make it easier for big companies to put profits before people. Then they have the nuclear power fantasy that will keep us living in the dark for a decade. The results are in: the experts have said that to have nuclear power in Australia will take eight to 10 years just to build the regulatory framework plus another 10-plus years to build a power plant. That takes us to 2045, with the majority of coal-fired power stations closing in 2035. Australians deserve fairness, opportunity and affordable energy, but the opposition's ideas are to undo the progress we've made for hardworking Australians. We simply can't afford for this to happen. So if you want to keep fee-free TAFE and if you want to keep same job, same pay, make sure you vote for Labor at the next election because the opposition is ready to rip this away, and that's disgusting for the people of the Hunter and disgusting for Australia. Personal Information and Privacy 46 13:42 Ms PRICE 249308 Durack Privacy and identity protection are fundamental rights in the digital age, and any legislation addressing online safety must prioritise these principles. While protecting our children on social media is important, it must not be done at the expense of personal privacy. The coalition has consistently stood firm on privacy concerns. Earlier this year we opposed the Albanese government's digital ID laws due to significant risks, and these same principles must guide us as we craft laws governing social media use. The reality is clear. Social media exposes our children to harm: grooming, bullying, body shaming and anxiety. This is the damaging side of social media that our children are facing, and it has created a youth mental health crisis. It is imperative, however, that we strike the right balance, which is why we on this side of the House have worked carefully to secure critical amendments to the legislation to ban under-16s from social media. We fought to guarantee that no Australian will be forced to provide a digital ID, drivers licence or passport when creating a social media account. Furthermore, we also ensured that platforms will be prohibited from using information collected for age-assurance purposes for any other reason unless the individual explicitly agrees. The coalition remains dedicated to the ongoing review and improvement of the bill to ban under-16s on social media. We commit to Australian families that we are watching the rollout very closely. Bali, Mr Ram Pal (Sharm) 46 13:43 Mr GOSLING 245392 Solomon Last week the Northern Territory lost a giant. Today friends and family say goodbye to Sharm Bali, a local legend in Darwin. He was born in India and migrated to Australia via England. He studied and worked in hospitality before arriving in the NT in 1982 and setting up Darwin's first Indian restaurant, the Maharaja. He worked in schools and tertiary institutions across the NT whilst also working several volunteer roles, including as president of the Indian Cultural Society of the Northern Territory. He was awarded the City of Darwin's Citizen of the Year award in 2021 for being regarded as one of the most generous Darwinians that year. After identifying a gap in the models of disability service delivery in the Territory, Sharm opened Territory Care and Support Services in 1999, which is now one of the leading providers of care in the Territory. Sharm was a passionate advocate for the NT, especially for the multicultural community. I had the pleasure of working with him a few years back setting up India Ideas Fest. Sharm is remembered as a loving husband to Kumi, a wonderful father to Keshini and Shyam, an adoring grandfather to Innika, Isla, Hamish, Rani and Luca, a beloved brother to Bobby, Kiran and Shanna and a kind father-in-law to Cameron and Ursula. Sharm Bali, rest in peace, mate. Valedictory 46 13:45 Mr GOODENOUGH 74046 Moore May I take this opportunity to thank the people of Moore, my constituents, who have sent me here as their representative. This year has been a particularly challenging one for many residents in our community, as we have faced both social and economic pressures and juggled cost-of-living issues. To all of our healthcare workers, emergency services personnel, community service workers and school educators: your contribution to our community is valued. This is also the time to thank the dedicated and skilled staff in my electorate office. Without them I would not be able to serve my community and respond to the volume of correspondence received. Thank you. I look forward to returning home and spending the next few weeks attending school graduations and community events and enjoying Christmas carols. Thank you to all the Parliament House staff—the clerks, the Serjeant-at-Arms, the office personnel, the cleaners, the Comcar drivers, the hospitality staff and the attendants—for your assistance on a daily basis. I wish you all a safe and restful holiday season with your family and friends, and, with your continued support, I look forward to returning in 2025 to continue making the community of Moore an even better place in which to live and work. Merry Christmas. Wong, Mr Ivan 47 13:46 Ms SITOU 298121 Reid Last week, Ivan Wong retired from the Chinese Australian Services Society. It's an extraordinary organisation that supports multicultural communities across all life stages, from child care and disability to residential aged care, home support, settlement and vocational training. Ivan has been the bedrock of that organisation for more than 30 years. He has contributed to CASS's evolution from a small organisation to a comprehensive service provider offering a full range of community services. Ivan played a significant role in developing CASS's home, ageing and disability services and has worked with over 800 CASS staff and 350 active volunteers from diverse Asian backgrounds. He was instrumental in the construction of an award-winning residential aged-care facility in Campsie in 2015. This facility delivers culturally sensitive care through bilingual staff. I've been to visit the facility in Campsie. It's a wonderful community hub with aged care alongside early childhood education and community groups. I want to say thank you to Ivan for your decades of service. You've inspired a new generation of leaders to carry forward your vision of culturally sensitive care to the community. Albanese Government 47 13:48 Mr VAN MANEN 188315 Forde We're coming to the tail end of the 47th parliament, and what a week of chaos we have seen. The government has failed to get any runs on the board this year, so what do they do? They try to cram as much into the tail end of the sitting period as they can. The Australian public will look back on 2024 and ask: Are my groceries cheaper? Is my electricity cheaper? Is my housing cheaper? The answer to all of these questions is a resounding no. Michael Gurney from Cedar Creek, in my electorate, reached out to me through the week. Michael's household electricity bill has skyrocketed. He wants explanations as to why. How does this government spin its way out of these ever-increasing costs for everybody right across the country? Iconic Aussie business, Seeley International, which has an office in my electorate, told a Senate select committee inquiry into Labor's cost-of-living crisis that their electricity prices have increased by almost 60 per cent this year. Managing director, Jon Seeley, said, 'Government energy policy has driven huge price increases for consumers and businesses like ours.' Australians are paying the price for Labor's reckless economic and energy policies. As people sit around the Christmas table, they'll ask a simple question: are we better off now than we were three years ago? The answer is no. Labor Candidate for Durack 47 13:49 Mr LIM 300130 Tangney Karen Wheatland is exactly the person you want fighting for you. She fought for me when I was a candidate. Later, she worked in my office and served hundreds and hundreds of the people of Tangney. Now, Karen Wheatland is the Labor candidate for Durack. Karen wants to stand up and advocate for the people of Durack. Karen was born and raised in Geraldton. She had summers in Kalbarri and school camp everywhere from Mount Magnet to Carnarvon. Her father was a respected real estate agent in Geraldton. Even as a young girl, Karen was always jumping in the car with her father and meeting people from all over the place in the community. Karen's life experiences would be of great value to our parliament. She has been a cook in the Abrolhos Islands, has fished out of Geraldton, has worked in the pearling industry in Broome and was in the merchant navy. In her long seafaring career she has seen the entire coastline of Durack. Karen is a strong advocate for equity and for those whose voices are underrepresented. She is a passionate leader. She has many years of experience as a councillor and deputy mayor. She loves her community, wants to serve, and will advocate and deliver for the people of Durack. Karen Wheatland—go for it! Economy 47 13:51 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume Today Labor has done a dirty deal with the Greens to rush through legislation without scrutiny, which will make life harder for Australian households and Australian businesses. That includes red-tape additions on business, opposition to bigger tax cuts for small business, and legislation to sack and stack the Reserve Bank Board, confirming that Labor speaks as one with the radical Greens on economic policy. This follows a week when Labor has consistently voted with the Greens on economic legislation. By voting with the Greens on the RBA, rather than accepting the coalition's clearly articulated red line issues, the Treasurer has confirmed that he aligns with the Greens on calling for the Reserve Bank governor to be sacked and on calling for the Reserve Bank to direct Australian businesses' access to finance. The Greens, in their dissenting report on the legislation, have called monetary policy 'a perversity' and have accused the Reserve Bank of practising 'neofeudalism'—and that's who the Treasurer aligns with. He would rather align himself with these views than guarantee the independence of the existing Reserve Bank Board, but he will trash every institution in this country—including, of course, the Future Fund. The Prime Minister must step in again—he's been doing that this week—to show some leadership and kill this deal. Workplace Relations 48 13:52 Mr BURNELL 300129 Spence Tomorrow is Black Friday. It is important to recognise that those bargains, which millions of people enjoy, don't come from nothing. They come from the efforts of workers around the country and beyond. Those efforts result in the billions of dollars of revenue their employers receive every year—employers like Amazon. But despite the backbreaking shifts and the stupidly high quotas that these workers fulfill to generate that revenue, Amazon doesn't give back. Their employees are instead met with appalling conditions on the job. This includes actual surveillance of human beings in the workplace, punitively enforced through advanced digital technology, to coercively control workers. Even worse, when these workers speak out about this—and they already spend every day fearing for their job security—Amazon makes it as hard as possible for them to organise, which entrenches that company's shocking behaviour even further. Amazon aren't only ripping off their workers with their idea of Black Friday deals. They're also actively dodging taxes in this country and elsewhere, rounding out a company doing everything it can to avoid corporate social responsibility both on the warehouse floor and across the nation as a whole. That's why I'm proud to stand in solidarity with the TWU, the SDA and workers all over the world to make Amazon pay this Black Friday. People work to live; they don't live to work. The sooner Amazon realises that, the sooner its employees will enjoy better lives. Emergency Services 48 13:54 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon Yesterday I had a briefing from the emergency services commissioner, and I would like to thank the government for that. The emergency services commissioner has said that, particularly for western Victoria, there is going to be a very early start to the fire season. The message was very clear: make sure that you are prepared, and make sure that you are prepared early, because the onset of fire season is coming a lot earlier for us than it otherwise would. Obviously, depending on the weather and, in particular, rainfall, what happens in January and February could see those extreme warnings apply also to those two months. That, of course, will be weather dependent. But for the month of December the message was clear: make sure that you've done all the work that's necessary to protect your house, and, if you're a volunteer, make sure that you do your minimum skills training so you'll be able to continue to volunteer with the local CFA. For professionals, we want to work with you to make sure we get the message out there that we are in for a very, very difficult fire season in western Victoria. Christmas 48 13:55 Ms BYRNES 299145 Cunningham With less than a month to go until Christmas, if you haven't got your gift-wrapping sorted yet, our very talented students at Capital Hill Early Childhood Centre have quite the deal for you. Stop by their store on the way to grab lunch or dinner today or tomorrow to pick up your one-of-a-kind and beautifully handcrafted wrapping paper and Christmas cards. I picked up mine yesterday from my little friend and budding entrepreneur Imogen Greene. When you hear, 'Next customer, please,' bellowing down the halls, make sure you stop and support a great cause. There's another bellowing voice that I know all kids would love to hear. Luckily, until Christmas Eve, kids can call the North Pole for free from any of Telstra's more than 14,000 payphones simply by dialling ho, ho, ho, which on the keypad is #464646. While this is a simple cost-free way for kids to chat one-on-one with Santa, it is also a great way to teach kids big or small how to use a payphone and how to memorise important phone numbers. Research shows that 54 per cent of Australians can't remember a single mobile or landline number in a vulnerable situation, but with all standard national calls free from payphones all year round this is an interactive, fun and exciting way to learn. You can find your closest payphone using the finder on telstra.com. Housing 48 13:57 Mr SUKKAR 242515 Deakin The housing crisis under this incompetent Labor government is just getting worse. We not only have fewer homes being built, fewer homes being completed, fewer first home buyers and fewer approvals—while all that is happening, we still have the world-record migration program being run by this government. There are 1.4 million new migrants with no idea of where they are going to live. On every single metric, the Australian people have seen housing go backwards under this shambolic Albanese government, but the sad news for Australians is the housing crisis will just get worse. If you look at the approval data over the next 12, 18 and 24 months, even fewer homes are going to be built. What is the big answer from the government? The big answer is: we want big corporates to own tens of thousands of homes in this country—fewer mum and dads owning homes and more big foreign corporates. The other big idea is their so-called Help to Buy program. It should be called the forced-to-sell program, because that's exactly what will happen to people who participate in it. The Australian people have spoken. They know this Labor government has no idea about housing. Sadly, that's why it's going to get worse under their watch. Christmas 49 13:59 Mr BURNS 278522 Macnamara This is 'The Twelve Days of Christmas' 2024 edition: On the first day of Christmas, parliament had scenes; we witnessed a new romance between the Liberals and the Greens. On the second day of Christmas, young people will be set; if we are re-elected, we'll keep wiping student debt. On the third day of Christmas, we want women to achieve; it's why we're paying super on paid parental leave. On the fourth day of Christmas, tax returns went hum; we delivered tax cuts for all, not just for some. On the fifth day of Christmas, Peter tried to go retail, announcing nuclear energy but forgetting any detail. On the sixth day of Christmas, still Liberals want us to rescind, but we are pushing on with record solar and wind. On the seventh day of Christmas, to the Liberals' surprise, Labor helped workers actually get a much-needed pay rise. On the eighth day of Christmas, the Greens lost the plot, saying to the Liberals, 'We'll vote with you guys on the lot.' On the ninth day of Christmas, the Liberals went into hibernation because the New South Wales division forgot to submit their nomination. On the 10th day of Christmas, digging their heels in deeper, the Liberals voted against our plan to make medicines cheaper. On the 11th day of Christmas, your future is safe with more highly skilled training and jobs thanks to fee-free TAFE. On the 12th day of Christmas, the others make us queasy. In 2025, let's stick with Albanese. The SPEAKER 53517 On that note, in accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has, thankfully, concluded. CONDOLENCES 49 CONDOLENCES Hodges, Hon. John Charles 49 Report from Federation Chamber 49 14:01 The SPEAKER 53517 The question is that the motion moved by the Prime Minister be agreed to. As a mark of respect, I ask all present to signify their approval by rising in their places. Question agreed to, honourable members standing in their places. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 49 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Environment 49 14:01 Ms LEY 00AMN Farrer My question is to the Minister for the Environment and Water. Does the government still intend to reform the EPBC Act in this term of parliament? Is the minister aware of any impediments to its passage? Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Members on my left will cease interjecting. The member was given the courtesy of silence, and the minister is going to be given that same courtesy. 14:02 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney It's a very interesting question coming from a former minister for the environment. Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! We just discussed showing courtesy as the deputy leader was shown. Let's just get through the first question. Ms PLIBERSEK 83M It's a very interesting question coming from a former minister for the environment who actually commissioned Professor Graeme Samuel to review the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, agreed with his recommendations, tried to get them through the parliament and didn't manage to do it. Having claimed that she would deliver environmental law reform, she didn't. We have in the Senate right now stage 2 of our environmental law reform. Stage 1 passed through this parliament around this time last year; we established the nature repair market and we expanded the water trigger. Stage 2 is in the Senate right now, and if those opposite had any sense, they would vote for it in the Senate. What it does is provide faster, clearer decision-making for business—something that business has been calling for since 2020, when the former minister reviewed— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will cease interjecting, and so will the member for Moreton. Mr Dutton 00AKI You didn't even vote for it! Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Mr Speaker, I think the Leader of the Opposition continues to mistake aggro for strength. Stage 2 of our environmental law reform has something for everyone. It's got faster, clearer decisions for business, and it's got much stronger environmental protections. What it does is establish Australia's first environment protection agency. It also establishes Environment Information Australia, which would provide much clearer data about how we're going with the environment and it would also provide information to business about where and how they can develop all of the projects that we know Australia needs—the infrastructure projects, the housing projects and so on. The real mystery here is how those opposite, having commissioned Professor Graeme Samuel to have a really good look at our environmental laws, were not able to accept Professor Samuel's recommendations given to your government when you were the minister. Albanese Government 50 14:05 Mrs PHILLIPS 147140 Gilmore My question is to the Prime Minister. How has the Albanese Labor government used the last two weeks of parliament to deliver for every Australian, and what has stood in the way? 14:05 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler Over the last fortnight of the parliament, we have concentrated on major reforms that will make a real difference for people—legislation to provide cost-of-living relief, including helping 40,000 Australians buy a home, free TAFE, fixing HECS indexation and increased wages for early childhood workers of 15 per cent; 10 per cent starts next week as a direct result of what we have done. We've also done major reforms to build and strengthen our future—importantly, major aged-care reform, the most significant reform in a generation, and we will have Future Made in Australia legislation passed in the Senate this afternoon. We've also got important legislation on social media to protect our young people. We also have important migration legislation that will also pass the Senate later today. Indeed the Senate is expected to pass more than 30 pieces of legislation just today, making a real difference, building more rental properties to take pressure off renters, protecting consumers purchasing buy-now pay-later products, strengthening Australia's protections against money laundering, strengthening and modernising the Reserve Bank of Australia, and legislating an objective for superannuation, making it clear that it is about a dignified retirement for more Australians. This is what it looks like to have a government that's prepared to work across the parliament to turn promises into progress. What those opposite have done consistently is just seek to oppose. We're getting things done; they're just getting angry, as we just saw during the last question. We're acting responsibly; they're acting recklessly. We're cutting the cost of living; they're cutting Medicare, pensions and housing. That's what they want to do. We're fighting for Australians to earn more and keep more of what they earn; they want people to work longer for less. We're fighting inflation; they're fighting amongst themselves. They talk a lot about industrial relations, but they have spent the last 2½ years on strike just saying no to absolutely everything whenever they could and not putting up an alternative. There have been almost three years of the parliament sitting, and this Leader of the Opposition is yet to come up with a single costed alternative policy. Albanese Government 51 14:08 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, the Australian people cannot believe how incompetent and weak your government has been over the last 2½ years. Your government wasted $450 million on the Voice referendum, which divided the country, and your economic and energy policies have driven up the prices of everything. The SPEAKER 53517 The Leader of the Opposition will pause. The member for Moreton, for yelling when someone is asking a question, is now going to be made an example of. You will leave the chamber under 94(a). The member for Moreton then left the chamber. The SPEAKER 53517 It may be the last day for the year, but we're not going to be having this sort of behaviour. It goes for everyone. The Leader of the Opposition will begin his question again. Mr DUTTON 00AKI My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, the Australian people cannot believe how incompetent and weak your government has been over the last 2½ years. Your government wasted $450 million on the Voice and divided our country. On economic and energy policies you've done nothing but drive up the prices of everything. Prime Minister, why not call an election now to put Australians out of their misery and allow a competent coalition government to get our country back on track? Opposition members interjecting— Ms Rishworth HWA Show us a bit more aggro! The SPEAKER 53517 Order! No! The Minister for Social Services! An honourable member interjecting— Mr Albanese R36 You'll never get to go, mate. The SPEAKER 53517 Order! When the House comes to order, the Prime Minister has the call. 14:10 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler That's not the first time that the Leader of the Opposition has called for an election, because he said we should have an election because we wanted to give a tax cut to every taxpayer. That was before he rolled over and had his tummy tickled and voted for it! And now he's suggesting that we should have an election on—I don't know—New Year's Day! Talk about 'in touch'! But he's got form when it comes to recklessly mouthing off. Remember, in the lead up last year to Australia Day, he demanded a boycott of Australia's largest employer, Woolworths, because they didn't stock the right thongs. He dumped his own 2030 targets without warning his party. He talks about a referendum; he's promised another one. He hasn't mentioned it since, but he made that commitment before the election. He said that one of his nuclear reactors would produce a Coke can's worth of radioactive waste. Well, he was wrong by a factor of—wait for it—12½ thousand. He called for a national ban on TikTok before he set up his own account. If you can't ban them, join them—that's his approach! His schemes are half baked. He has nothing but anger and recklessness. He has no costings and no detail for any policy that he is putting forward—policy positions that barely survive a round of breakfast TV. I don't know what he'll do next week when Ray retires. Without his Thursday mornings of those tough interviews, I don't know what he'll do! There's no accountability from this bloke and no hope from him. It's just 'no' to everything. And he of all people has the hide to speak about division with his record of seeking to divide people. Whether it was the African community in Melbourne or whether it was all the other comments that he has made, he has a whole history of seeking to divide Australians. Everything he has done points towards that. He's made a career of being angry, pointing at other people and saying, 'You should be angry about them.' That is who this bloke's character is, and the Australian people know. The SPEAKER 53517 There was far too much noise during that answer. We're going to see if everyone can improve their behaviour for the remainder of question time. If not, there will have to be actions taken. Medicare 51 14:13 Dr REID 300126 Robertson My question is to the Minister for Health and Aged Care. How is the Albanese Labor government working to make medicines cheaper for all Australians and strengthening Medicare? Why is the government so committed to restoring bulk-billing after a decade of cuts and neglect, and are there any threats to Medicare? 14:14 Mr BUTLER HWK Hindmarsh I want to thank the member for Robertson, because there is no-one in this chamber who has a deeper understanding of what is happening on the frontline in health care right now than the member for Robertson, because, when he's not in this building or working hard as a local MP, he's pulling shifts as an emergency doctor at the Wyong Hospital, seeing every day the impacts of a decade of cuts and neglect to Medicare. That's why the member for Robertson and everyone on this side of the House campaigned so hard on our promise to strengthen Medicare and make medicines cheaper. Those cuts to Medicare were felt deepest by general practice, the backbone of our healthcare system. Bulk-billing was in freefall. General practice said that they were at a tipping point without further investment. That is why we tripled the bulk-billing incentive, the biggest investment in the history— Ms Ley 00AMN What about cutting mental health? What about cutting 20 appointments to 10? The SPEAKER 53517 The Minister for Health and Aged Care is going to pause. I don't like interjections interrupting ministers, because I want to hear their answers. Deputy Leader of the Opposition, if you're just going to continually give commentary or just roll through with non-stop communication, it's very, very difficult for question time to operate in that way, and I don't think anyone wants that. So, to help me hear the answer, I'm going to ask you to cease interjecting so that other members—perhaps the one who asked the question—can listen to the answer as well. Mr BUTLER HWK Thank you, Speaker, even though I've become accustomed to the white noise. We stopped the slide in bulk-billing and I'm really pleased to report that there's been a rebound—an additional 5.4 million free visits to the doctor in just 12 months. Beyond that, we also topped up the annual overall increase to the Medicare rebate, so, in just two years, this Prime Minister and this Treasurer have delivered bigger increases to the Medicare rebate than happened in nine long years under those opposite. Along with higher payments to support practice nurses and a range of other things, this has really boosted general practice—their confidence and their financial integrity. What the college tells us now is that more GPs are bulk-billing more of the time and, really excitingly, more junior doctors are choosing general practice as their career. We also promised 50 Medicare urgent-care clinics, and as of today we've delivered 82, and more will be delivered in coming weeks. Seven days a week, fully bulk-billed, they've already treated more than 900,000 patients with high-quality, free urgent care. Of course we promised cheaper medicines, and we've certainly delivered on that. Last year alone, there were 22 million additional scripts to pensioners, completely free of charge. We delivered the biggest cut to the price of medicines for general patients ever, and we finally allowed up to six million patients to get their scripts for ongoing chronic conditions for 60 days, not just 30. So there are more doctors, more bulk-billing, more free urgent care and cheaper medicines. This is making a real difference every day to millions of Australians. We know there is more to do, and we are committed to doing more. Only the Labor Party will strengthen Medicare. We know you simply can't trust the Liberals on health. Insurance 52 14:17 Ms LE 295676 Fowler As we come to the end of the parliamentary term, I would like to wish everybody a very merry Christmas and a safe new year. I am looking forward to seeing you all again in 2025. My question is to the Prime Minister. At my manufacturing roundtable in Fowler, people shared with me that they are grappling with the rising cost of energy, supply, labour, freight and insurance, to name a few. What steps have your government shaken to tackle insurance costs, which are adding to the cost of living for middle Australians? 14:18 Mr JONES A9B Whitlam I thank the member for Fowler for her question and for the good wishes that she extends to all members of this House, and I return those to the member for Fowler as well. We know that Australian households and businesses are doing it tough, and insurance affordability is a key driver of those pressures. Since coming to government, the government has put in place a comprehensive plan to help address some of the drivers of insurance costs. When you're looking at the key driver of insurance costs, it's the underlying risk, whether that's severe weather events, including severe weather events exaggerated by climate change; whether it's a century of poor planning decisions and inefficient or improper building standards which mean we're building the wrong houses and the wrong buildings in the wrong places; or, indeed, whether it's decisions of local or state governments which are adding to the accumulated costs in insurance for businesses and households around the country. In fact, there are some immediate things that other tiers of government could do to address insurance affordability. One would be to address the stamp duty impost on insurance contracts, which is adding a tax on a tax for insurers, households and small businesses. Local governments, indeed, continue to do dumb things by building the wrong buildings in the wrong places. If there is anyone in this place who has the capacity to influence local governments in the decisions they are making around approvals and planning processes then that would add to improving insurance affordability across the country. There are some things the Commonwealth government is looking at. In particular, I want to pay tribute to the fantastic work that the member for Fraser has done as chair of the House economics committee, ably assisted by I see the member for Macquarie and the member for Calare, who was instrumental in establishing this committee. A tremendous body of work has been put in place by this committee, with 89 recommendations, some of them to government, some of them to industry and some of them to regulators. Over the coming months we will be working through those recommendations and will have a response to parliament and the community in the early stages of next year. But there is work underway the moment and that includes the establishment of the Disaster Ready Fund, $1 billion, that we have established to spend over the next five years to put in place mitigation efforts, particularly in those disaster-prone regions, to ensure we can firm up infrastructure, and fund community and household-level improvements. We have established a housing insurance partnership so we can have the data and information that insurers have available to communities to put downward pressure on insurance premiums. There is a lot of work happening, a lot more to come. Economy 53 14:21 Ms MILLER-FROST 296272 Boothby My question is to the Treasurer. What progress has the Albanese Labor government made in the fight against inflation and helping with the cost of living? What obstacles stand in the way? 14:21 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin Thanks to the member for Boothby, who is focused as always on the cost-of-living pressures being faced in her community and, indeed, right around Australia. We know that when we came to office inflation was much higher and rising, real wages were falling substantially and living standards were falling as well. Even with all the progress we have been making across so many different policy areas run through a moment ago by the Prime Minister and in the Senate earlier today, our major focus throughout has been the fight against inflation and helping Australians with the cost of living. We know that we have made really quite substantial progress when it comes to inflation but, as I have said on a number of occasions, we know that doesn't always translate to how people are feeling or faring in the economy. We know we have more work to do and that is why our cost-of-living help is so important. Any objective observer of what is happening with inflation in our country over the past 2½ years would recognise and acknowledge that every aggregate measure of inflation is now much lower than when we took office. It is true of the headline, quarterly and monthly. It is true of trim mean. It is true of non-tradable. It's true of excluding volatiles. All the measures of inflation, all of the aggregate measures, are much lower now on our watch than they were under those opposite. That is partly because of our surpluses, partly because of our cost-of-living help. It's about our responsible economic management. It's also because we are taking a very tough approach to the supermarkets in this country. It beggars belief that earlier today, when this side of the House voted for farmers and families, when this side of the House voted for a mandatory code for groceries with tough penalties, those opposite voted for a protection racket for the big supermarkets. They talked a big game but, when it came time to put their hands up for farmers and families, they abandoned them once again, just like how they have vacated the field more broadly when it comes to the cost of living. Australians are doing it tough. They would be doing it tougher were it not for our cost-of-living help, and they would be doing it much tougher under those opposite. We know that those opposite are a risk to household budgets because we know their record. We know that, at every turn, they voted against cost-of-living help. We know that last time they are in office they went after wages, they went after Medicare, they went after the housing, and all of that meant that, when we came to office, inflation was much higher, living standards were going backwards and there were debt and deficits as far as the eye could see. In the last 2½ years we have made substantial progress but we know there is more work to do. Our priority on this side of the House is getting inflation down, getting wages up, strengthening Medicare and building more homes, and we will continue to do that despite the opportunistic opposition of those opposite. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Casey has interjected 17 times since question time has begun. I may not mention a person's name, but I keep a tally on how many times people are interjecting. That behaviour is completely unacceptable, so you will leave the chamber under standing order 94(a). The member for Casey then left the chamber. DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 54 DISTINGUISHED VISITORS Calabria, Mr Tony 54 14:25 The SPEAKER 53517 Before I call the next questioner, I have a special announcement to make. I'm pleased to announce that present in the gallery today is Tony Calabria, the father of the Calabria family that has owned and operated the Parliament House institution that we all love, Aussies cafe, for over 20 years. He's here today with his family and we recognise his years of service to members, senators, staff and all of the thousands of people who have visited Parliament House. Tony, on behalf of all the members, we thank you for the many years of sharing with us your rich stories of life, work and, your greatest love, your family. On indulgence, I call the Prime Minister. 14:25 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler It is indeed a great pleasure to have Tony Calabria join us today. It's unusual to see him up there in the gallery, rather than behind the counter at Aussies. Tony is the man who did so much to enhance this seat of democracy here. You are so welcome. Parliament House is, of course, one of the largest buildings in the Southern Hemisphere and the most visited building in Australia. Your presence there is just absolutely extraordinary. You and your family have made Aussies as an institution such a part of those of us who've been coming here for quite some time, whether as members, their staff or staff of the parliament—it's a part of our being home. It's a cafeteria where everyone is welcome and lots of chats take place between people, and it is very much at the heart of this building in terms of its spirit. You have been such an important part of this building, so I thank you and make this point: in the discussions that you have, whether about different sorts of football—the round-ball game or rugby league and your beloved Canberra Raiders—or, as a fellow Italo-Australian, about the connections between the Italian community in Australia, who, of course, have made such an enormous contribution, particularly to small business, your commitment and your friendliness are deeply appreciated. My son, who is now 23, has been going to Aussies since he was in a pram; this week he was there having a cappuccino as a 23-year-old. We will missing seeing you every day in the parliament, but I'm sure we will run into you. To you and your family, you are much loved by everyone in this building and we thank you. The SPEAKER 53517 On indulgence, the Leader of the Opposition. 14:28 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson I join with the Prime Minister and support his very lovely words in relation to Tony, who has been a feature of this place and a dear friend to many of us for a long period of time. In the 23 years that I've been going to Aussies, I've never been there when Tony or Dom or Anna haven't been there. So I don't know what's happening at Aussies right now! There may be staffers going for free coffees. Something is happening, but it's wonderful to see your beautiful family up in the gallery today, Tony. Tony came as a 14-year-old migrant to our country. He has worked every day since then. He's educated his children, provided a role model and given that love to his family that has created a remarkable legacy. Tony, I wish you every success, mate, in your health and into the future. I know it's a wonderful joy to you to see Dom take over the business and for your grandson now to be involved in the business as well. To all of you, I say thank you very much for providing us with the warmth of the reception that we are greeted with and the way in which you provide support to us, our families and everyone in the building. It has meant a lot to us, and it's a very significant part of our lives to celebrate two decades of your service to this parliament. We celebrate your great migrant story but also, most importantly today, the Calabria family. We wish you every success into the future. Honourable members: Hear, hear! QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 54 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Cost of Living 54 14:29 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume Prime Minister, you promised all families will be better off under Labor, but instead, under Labor, interest rates have increased 12 times, core inflation is higher than every major advanced economy and is rising, living standards have fallen off a cliff—more than any country in the OECD and the worst on record—and we're in a household recession which is the longest on record. Prime Minister, how can Australians possibly afford another three years of Labor? 14:30 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for Hume for his question. The truth is that, if he had his way, Australians would be worse off because they wouldn't have got the support that we have been prepared to support and sought through this parliament. Under those opposite, every Australian would have been worse off. Without our tax cuts, 84 per cent of taxpayers would be worse off. 2.9 million taxpayers wouldn't have got a dollar. Without our cheaper medicines, Australians would be $1 billion worse off. Without the Medicare urgent care clinics, families would have missed out on 900,000 free doctor appointments. Without our wage increases, 2.6 million award wage workers would be worse off. Without our energy rebates, millions of households would be $800 worse off and almost a million small businesses would be $650 worse off. Without our cheaper childcare, 1.2 million families would be worse off. Without our HECS relief, three million Australians would have worse debts—legislation that those opposite voted against, of course, just this week. And we know what they think of free TAFE, because the Deputy Leader of the Opposition said: … it's a key principle and tenet of the Liberal Party: if you don't pay for something, you don't value it. Here we have free TAFE, Medicare—we want people to have bulk-billing when they go to the doctor. We know the Leader of the Opposition tried to get rid of it, but we want people to be able to see a doctor. We want people to be able to get the course in free TAFE to make a difference as well. Those opposite have opposed all of those measures. They have opposed, of course, our industrial relations changes that have seen thousands of workers be paid equal to the people that they're working with if they have the same qualifications and the same experience. Of course they opposed the increases in the minimum wage that we have done three times. We want people to earn more and keep more of what they earn. What those opposite want is for people to work longer for less. Whether it's strengthening Medicare; building more homes; cutting inflation from having a '6' in front of it to having a '2' in front of it, making a difference there; or lifting real wages, all of those measures that we have put in place have been opposed by those opposite, and then they have the hide to speak about living standards. How about they, just for once, vote for an improvement in living standards and cost of living—because they failed to do it for three years. (Time expired) Manufacturing Industry 55 14:33 Mr NEUMANN HVO Blair My question is to the Minister for Industry and Science. How is the Albanese Labor government backing manufacturing to deliver for Australians today and in future generations? Minister, what are the risks? 14:33 Mr HUSIC 91219 Chifley Thanks to the member for Blair for his question and his continued support for manufacturing, especially across regional Queensland. I know the member for Blair is a bit of a history buff, and he would know that tomorrow is 76 years to the day the first Australian-made Holden rolled off the production line at Fishermans Bend in Victoria. Captured in an iconic photo was a beaming Ben Chifley, a prime minister who actually called for car manufacturers to come into Australia instead of driving them out. It was a government that was determined to reconstruct manufacturing in the aftermath of the turmoil of an awful global event: World War II. Similarly, the Albanese government committed to reconstructing manufacturing in the aftermath of the pandemic, where we saw that the things we needed most weren't there when we needed them most. We were too reliant on broken, concentrated supply chains and needed to stand on our own two feet and make more things here. A country that makes things makes great, secure jobs. From our point of view, we wanted to make a contrast from those opposite, who, in the last decade, sent Holden and the rest of the car industry packing. They put manufacturing into a deep freeze. We're bringing it back out of the cold. Under them, 100,000 manufacturing jobs went; under us, 70,000 have grown. And we have provided, through the National Reconstruction Fund, a platform to reinvigorate manufacturing. The first investments under the NRF have started, delivering, for example, security for workers in our industrial heartland, such as the 350 skilled jobs at RME in Toowoomba, which is being supported by the NRF. Mr HUSIC 91219 I note the interjection from the member for Groom. As I said, these people boo Santa. We are investing in the member's electorate, and he's opposed to it. I remember when there was a member for Groom who backed Aussie manufacturing. Remember Ian Macfarlane? Ian Macfarlane actually championed manufacturing, and the only other industry minister on their side who got it was the one sitting next to the member for Groom, the member for McPherson. Apart from that, they just sneer at manufacturing, oppose the NRF, oppose energy price relief for our manufacturers, oppose tax cuts for manufacturing workers, and oppose fee-free TAFE to bring more skilled workers into manufacturing. We are about being a country that can stand on its own two feet, giving great jobs to blue-collar workers. All they are about is photo-ops and denying the chance for manufacturing to grow. (Time expired) Energy 55 14:37 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. Responding to the New South Wales electricity blackouts yesterday, Premier Chris Minns was forced to concede that: Solar production in the energy market starts to come off at 3pm, exactly when people start to return home. So if you could not use your pool filter, dishwasher, or washing machine between 3pm and 8pm, you'd be helping the grid. Minister, this was just one moderately hot day before summer. Is this what Australian families can expect under Labor's reckless race to 82 per cent renewable energy by 2030? 14:37 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon I thank my honourable friend for the question. Yesterday I outlined to the House the situation in New South Wales, which was that five power plant units were down—four coal and one gas—three to be expected and two breakdowns. And that did put pressure on the system. Now, it takes a particular level of prejudice against renewable energy to say that coal-fired power station breakdowns are caused by renewable energy. I'm not quite sure of the logic there! But I'm sure those opposite have an explanation as to how that occurred. It's all the fault of renewable energy again! I know that those opposite are disappointed that yesterday there actually were enough energy reserves in New South Wales and there were no blackouts caused by lack of energy. That comes as a considerable disappointment to the member for Fairfax in particular, who wakes up every morning, turns the light switch on and is disappointed when the lights come on, because he's more interested in political power than reliable power. Mr Taylor 231027 That's you, Chris; that's you! Mr BOWEN DZS The member for Hume interjects. He's been very voluble. He asked me this morning whether I've kept the lights on, and I did manage to give him an affirmative answer. To be fair, the member for Hume is an expert in these matters, because he used to hold my portfolio. They say it's the responsibility of the energy minister to ensure that there are no blackouts, and they have a point. The member for Hume knows a lot about it. In 2019, when he held my job, he gave a speech, and he said: There are real risks, particularly in Victoria as we approach summer and it's important that we apply pressure to ensure there's balance in our electricity system. That is what the member for Hume said when he was Minister for Energy. He says there were no blackouts. On 25 January 2019, 200,000 customers did not get power because of a lack of reserve when he was the Minister for Energy. There have been no blackouts caused by lack of energy while we've been in office, so it's Taylor 200,000 and Bowen nil so far. That's the track record that we have. In the same speech, the member for Hume said that we need to ensure ongoing coal-fired power, and he said: One of the Morrison government's top energy priorities is to avoid premature closure of our coal- and gas-fired power stations … Following him giving that speech, it was announced in October 2019 that Callide B would close, in October 2019 that Loy Yang would close, in March 2021 that Yallourn would close, and in September 2021 that Mount Piper would close, and then, in February 2022, Loy Yang and, in February 2022, Eraring, which he heard about on the radio. The New South Wales government didn't tell him and the company didn't tell him, because no-one trusted him. Defence Industry 56 14:41 Ms SWANSON 264170 Paterson My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister. How is the Albanese Labor government delivering on key capabilities with a focus on the defence industry workforce, and what stands in the way? 14:41 Mr MARLES HWQ Corio I thank the member for her question. Yesterday, I met with Patrice Caine, the world head of Thales, a global defence industry prime, which, in Australia, builds our iconic Bushmasters, and we've just selected them to produce 155-millimetre ammunition. On Tuesday, I met with Charles Woodburn, the global head of BAE, who, of course, build Australia's Hunter class frigates. Together, these two companies employ more than 10,000 Australians in high-skilled, high-wage jobs. Be it Thales or BAE, Australia's defence industry is growing. Indeed, in the last financial year, we spent $22 billion on Australia's defence industry, and that is a record. But the real challenge is finding people with the skills, and that's particularly the case for BAE, who, in partnership with ASC, will build our future submarines. That is why we are establishing a skills and training academy at the Osborne Naval Shipyard in Adelaide. What underpins all of that is a robust public TAFE system with free TAFE at its heart. That's why this government has committed to that—100,000 free TAFE places each and every year from 2027, building on the 500,000 places which have already been taken up since we came to power. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Herbert is now warned. Mr MARLES HWQ Now, we know that those opposite think all of that is a complete waste of money. Indeed, it would appear that the alternative skills minister of this country thinks that TAFE is just a waste of time, and, when it comes to the Leader of the Opposition, he barely uses the word 'TAFE'. AUKUS, quite apart from capability, will be one of the great industrial endeavours in our country's history. Just as the Snowy Hydro transformed our economy in the fifties and sixties, building submarines in the decades to come will take Australia's industry into the future. The coalition think that this can be conjured up if they dance around the fire a bit more—chanting their slogans, yelling into the echo chamber and issuing press releases—but we understand that this future will be built on people—people with skills acquired at TAFE. So TAFE is now becoming a critical enabling capability of our national security, which is being completely supported by the Albanese Labor government. Energy 57 14:44 Mr TED O'BRIEN 138932 Fairfax My question goes to the minister for Climate Change and Energy. Can the minister confirm that the work of Frontier Economics that shows the real cost of the government's energy policy to be $642 billion instead of $122 billion is accurate? The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Perth is now warned. 14:44 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon I'm particularly grateful to the member for Fairfax for the question. This is a report that he released to News Ltd while the Prime Minister and I were overseas. The member for Fairfax gets a Profile in Courage Award for that! But good on him. He released the report to News Ltd. He said: 'The government's costings are the biggest con job ever attempted based on the Frontier Economics report.' He backed himself here today. Now he asks us to confirm whether the Frontier Economics report is accurate, if I recall his question correctly. I'm happy to give the member Fairfax some good news, because actually I was quite impressed with the Frontier Economics report, particularly page 6, which says: We found that the Report Modelling matched AEMO's ISP modelling results very closely … It went on to say: Similarly, when we compare the sum of the real costs over the modelling period to 2050 we find that the Report Modelling is about 91% the same as AEMO's ISP results. Yes, I do think that's accurate. The SPEAKER 53517 Order, the member Fairfax and the minister! The minister has completed his answer and the member Fairfax has definitely completed his question. Cybersafety 57 14:46 Mr LAXALE 299174 Bennelong My question is to the Minister for Communications. How will the passage of the Albanese Labor government's minimum age for social media progress the government's broader online safety agenda? 14:46 Ms ROWLAND 159771 Greenway I thank the member for his question and his ongoing advocacy and support on this issue of national significance. Subject to passage in the Senate, we are on track this week to deliver world-leading reform in a novel and challenging space. The social media minimum age legislation will set in law the minimum age of 16 for young people to access social media. The Prime Minister stated his support for a minimum age earlier this year, and this sent a strong signal. The Albanese government is on the side of supporting parents and protecting young people. Our decision as a government to legislate and the fulfilment of our promise to introduce legislation this year was another important step forward. The national debate about this issue is right for our democracy, and it is clear that legislating a minimum age for social media widely reflects the views of our community. We are making significant progress against the markers set by Australians, and the latest YouGov data shows that we're on the right path. Seventy-seven per cent of Australians surveyed support our legislation setting a minimum age of 16 for social media. The parliament is making progress. Furthermore, 75 per cent of Australians surveyed support our digital duty of care and 87 per cent of Australians surveyed want stronger penalties for social media companies that breach our laws. The bill before parliament reflects this community expectation. It will strengthen penalties for systemic breaches of codes to bring them in line with penalties for privacy or consumer breaches, which are set at $50 million. Once passed, this legislation will sit within the broader suite of deliverables in the Albanese government's online safety agenda. We brought forward the review of the Online Safety Act by 12 months to ensure it was fit for purpose and to respond to new and emerging harms. The digital duty of care is a significant step in response to the excellent work by Delia Rickard. We quadrupled ongoing base funding for eSafety to ensure they are equipped to do their important work. We established the inquiry into social media and its impacts on Australian society, and that's made a number of important recommendations that go to the government's principle that online safety is not a set-and-forget space. We are undertaking an age-assurance trial, which will inform the types of technology the platforms can consider applying to ensure a social media account creator is at least 16 years old. These online safety reforms are a matter of national priority, and I thank everyone who has contributed to the debate. I acknowledge our state and territory leaders, who have engaged constructively through the National Cabinet to deliver this outcome. The premiers of New South Wales and South Australia have been instrumental in this regard. I urge, as I hope do all members here, our Senate colleagues to seek prompt passage of this reform to allow the Albanese government's important work to continue. Bathurst: Infrastructure 58 14:49 Mr GEE 261393 Calare To the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government: the city of Bathurst's beautiful heritage CBD is becoming increasingly congested, with a lack of parking to access local businesses and community events. The Bathurst CBD community car park is a catalyst project between the Bathurst Regional Council and Bathurst RSL Club which would address this issue and has the potential to spark a new medical precinct. Will your government support this very important regional project for Bathurst? 14:50 Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR Ballarat I thank the member for Calare for his question. He is doing what all members do, by being a strong and clear advocate for the interests of his community. The Bathurst car park upgrade project, as I understand the member indicated when he met with my office yesterday, is a project that is subject to application of round 2 of the Growing Regions Program, which is making $393 million available for regional community projects—and, as I said, he met with my staff about that yesterday. As to these projects, the applications are currently under assessment. As the process is still underway, it would be inappropriate for me to comment on applications that are under assessment. We need to allow the process to be completed in a fair way, in accordance with the published program guidelines. Round 2 of the Growing Regions Program had been open for applications since 5 September and closed on 10 October. In accordance with best practice, we will allow the assessment process, and then departmental recommendations to be made, before final decisions are taken, and we'll announce those outcomes when that is done. This is because we have done what we said we were going to do, and that is to deliver grants programs that are transparent and provide value for money. We have, frankly, cleaned up the appalling mess left by those opposite, whose legacy was of scathing Auditor-General reports, sports rorts, colour-coded spreadsheets—ignoring the grant guidelines for their own electoral benefit. We have improved the processes for grants by ensuring that they are merit based, with clear assessment processes. We have significantly improved the processes for grants—so much so that the Auditor-General has recently found, in two reports on the Growing Regions Program, that the design and implementation of the program has been effective. It found that applications were assessed in accordance with the guidelines—something those opposite should pay attention to—and in accordance with the funding recommendations that were made. The SPEAKER 53517 Has the minister concluded her answer? The SPEAKER 53517 Well, I was also checking with the minister whether she has concluded her answer. The SPEAKER 53517 Thank you, Minister. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order. The member for Riverina is entitled to raise a point of order and he is entitled to be heard. Mr McCormack 219646 My point of order is on relevance. The member asked a very specific question about a very specific project, and the minister should not delve into past programs of past governments—which were very good governments, I might add. The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The Minister for Industry and Science is warned. The minister was asked about a specific project. In her answer she is entitled to do some comparing and contrasting. She just needs to make sure her answer is being directly relevant to the project and in line with her portfolio duties. Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR As I said at the start, this is a project that has a current application before the Growing Regions Program, which I am talking about in relation to the audit report. It, of course, found that funding recommendations and decisions were made in accordance with the Commonwealth grant rules and guidelines. We have spent a lot of time returning integrity to grant programs—following, frankly, what was the shameful record of those opposite we have had to deal with— Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR of which the member who's putting his hands up might like to inform himself. We have also had to deal with the legacy of robodebt and the contracting arrangements that have resulted as a result of robodebt, from those opposite, in all of our grants programs— (Time expired) Education 59 14:54 Mr LIM 300130 Tangney My question is to the Minister for Education. What is the Albanese Labor government doing to build a better and fairer education system after almost a decade of neglect? 14:54 Mr CLARE HWL Blaxland Can I thank my friend the legend that is the member for Tangney. Two and a half years ago, we were confronted with a mess in education. Childcare costs had skyrocketed by a massive 49 per cent under the Liberals, and parents felt it. Public schools had billions of dollars ripped out of them by the Liberals. We've seen the impact of that over the last decade, with the drop in the number of kids finishing high school. The Liberals also jacked up the cost of university degrees and ripped billions out of TAFE and universities. You see the impact of that today in the drop in the number of young people from poor families at university. Over the last 2½ years, we've started the work of turning this around. We've cut the cost of child care for more than a million Australian families, and now we're capping fees to keep prices down for parents. We're also making sure that, finally, we pay the people who care for and educate our youngest children properly. That 15 per cent pay rise starts to roll out from next week. We're also fixing the funding of our public schools. We're putting billions back in after the Liberals ripped billions of dollars out, and we're tying that funding to real and practical reforms, like phonics and numeracy checks to identify kids who are falling behind, and evidence based teaching and catch-up tutoring to help kids catch up. We're also making free TAFE permanent, and we're opening the doors of our universities wider, to help more young people from poor families, from our outer suburbs and from the bush to get a crack. To do that, we're doubling the number of university study hubs in the regions and the outer suburbs. We've passed laws this week to massively expand those free bridging courses that help people to get ready for university. We've also passed laws this week that provide, for the first time, financial help for teaching, nursing and social work students while they do their practical training. We're cutting the HECS debt of three million Australians. This week, we cut $3 billion of that debt, and if we win the next election we'll cut it even more. The truth is this is what only Labor governments do, and it's what Liberal governments undo. And it's just the start. There's more to do to build a better and fairer education system; to build the sorts of skills in the workforce that we're going to need in the years and the decades ahead; to build the sort of country where your chances in life don't depend on who your mum and dad are, where you live or the colour of your skin; and to build Australia's future. Energy 59 14:57 Mrs McINTOSH 281513 Lindsay My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. Next week marks three years since the now minister first promised Australians their electricity bills would be reduced by $275 if they voted Labor. Earlier today, in a train wreck interview with Sky's Laura Jayes, the minister refused to admit Labor has broken this promise, saying he was 'not walking away from that policy'. When will the minister finally be straight with the Australian people and admit that Labor's $275 bill cut promise has been broken? 14:58 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon I appreciate the question from the member for Lindsay, and I'm delighted she was watching my interview with Laura Jayes earlier today, where I pointed out, for example, that the inflation figures released by the ABS this week showed a 35 per cent reduction in energy prices, the biggest fall in energy prices ever recorded in Australian history, as a direct result of government policy, and where I talked about the Australian Energy Market Commission report that's out today, which shows that the increased emphasis on renewable energy over the next decade will reduce energy prices by 13 per cent; about the impact of the government rebates which this government has introduced and which the member for Lindsay and all her colleagues voted against; and about the impact of coal and gas price caps, which we introduced and which all the members opposite voted against. The 53517 The member for Lindsay has asked her question. The member for Mallee will cease interjecting. Mr BOWEN DZS These are things we are happy to talk about with the Australian people and with the opposition because the opposition's track record, when it comes to delivering real cost-of-living relief to the Australian people, is appalling. This government's track record is to take short-term measures to provide immediate relief and to take longer term measures to put downward pressure on prices by introducing the cheapest form of energy while those opposite want to introduce the most expensive form of energy. This is why modelling and analysis of their policies show it would put up energy bills by $1,200 a year. The opposition might think that's a great result, but the Australian people would beg to differ. Housing 60 15:00 Ms SCRYMGOUR F2S Lingiari My question is to the Minister for Housing and the Minister for Homelessness. Minister, how is the Albanese Labor government delivering on its promise to help more Australians into a stable home? Minister, are there any obstacles that have stood in the way? 15:01 Ms O'NEIL 140590 Hotham I'd like to thank the member for Lingiari for her question. She is a hugely respected member of our caucus and a great advocate for Territorians. We came to government in the middle of a housing crisis, which has been a generation in the making, to find a Commonwealth which had completely vacated housing throughout a wasted decade. Remember, Mr Speaker, that for most of the time the coalition were in office they were so tapped out of housing they didn't even have a housing minister. From those ashes, the Albanese government has constructed the boldest and most ambitious housing agenda that an Australian government has had for a generation, and it's not surprising that we've done that because the Prime Minister, the Treasurer and the former housing minister, Minister Collins, have an acute understanding of the absolutely transformative impact that safe and affordable housing has for all of our citizens. It has been a really big week for housing. Measures that will pass this parliament this week will build more houses, better protect Australia's renters and give more Australians the opportunity to own their own home. These initiatives have passed the parliament because they have received widespread support across the chamber. And there is some serious housing expertise around this chamber, and I want to acknowledge some of the crossbench, in particular, who have worked closely with us. We have massive housing expertise amongst the people behind me, but I want to also acknowledge Senators David Pocock and Lambie in the other place and the members for Wentworth, Kooyong, Curtin, Indi and North Sydney, amongst others. I want the public to understand that we have been elected at a time when crossbenchers have also come into this parliament and they have done the hard yakka. They've worked with experts, they've worked with stakeholders and they've engaged with our government. As a consequence, we are making better laws because of their contribution. Earlier today I announced some really important amendments that our government will make to the Build to Rent scheme, which will make sure that it provides better protection for Australian renters. It will build 80,000 much-needed rental homes for our country and it will bring more affordable housing online more quickly. These reforms are really broadly backed. It was a great bill coming into the parliament; it's going to be an even better bill coming out because of the hard work and due diligence done by people across this chamber. I want to compare that attitude to the reckless negativity that we see from those opposite. I spend a lot of time with crossbenchers, engaging with them deeply on housing policy. The shadow minister over here won't even attend a briefing about the housing bills that we have before this parliament. We know that those opposite want to cut $19 billion from our housing program. They want to abolish Help to Buy. They want to stand in the path of childcare workers and disability workers getting home ownership. There's a really clear choice at this election on housing between those opposite and their endless no, no, no and us, a government of progress that will build, build, build. Whistleblower Protection 60 15:04 Mr WILKIE C2T Clark My question is to the Attorney-General. Attorney-General, this government has undeniably declared war on whistleblowers. Despite promises before the last election to fix Public Interest Disclosure Act and Corporations Act whistleblower protections, we've only seen minor tweaks and it's obvious you're kicking any meaningful reform into the long grass. Will you now, finally, actually do something to protect whistleblowers in this parliament or the next, including by supporting my bill to establish a whistleblower protection authority? 15:04 Mr DREYFUS HWG Isaacs I thank the member for Clark for his question. Our government is committed to delivering strong, effective and accessible protections for whistleblowers. He seems to have forgotten that in June last year the parliament passed priority amendments to the Public Interest Disclosure Act, which ensured immediate improvements to the public sector whistleblower scheme, to ensure that they would be in place in time for the commencement of the National Anti-Corruption Commission. The reforms implemented 21 of the 33 recommendations from the 2016 review of the Public Interest Disclosure Act, which was conducted by Mr Philip Moss. It was of course, as he again appears to have forgotten, a statutory review that we put in place when I brought the Public Interest Disclosure Act to this parliament in 2013. Regrettably the former government failed to act on that 2016 review by Mr Philip Moss. We did act. This was the first significant public sector whistleblower reform since the Public Interest Disclosure Act was first enacted a decade ago. The government is now progressing a second, broader stage of reforms, which includes the release of a consultation paper and public consultation on additional supports for public sector whistleblowers, including whether a whistleblower protection authority should be established. Submissions received as part of the consultation process are being used to inform the government's next steps for reform. If I could say something generally about the way in which the member for Clark, and a number of other people, approach the question of the operation on the Public Interest Disclosure Act: before 2013 the Commonwealth had no protection for whistleblowers at all. Every state and both territories had legislated schemes of whistleblower protection. A Labor government legislated a scheme of whistleblower protection in 2013. To take the last year alone, there were 684 public interest disclosures. So far from the situation being that there isn't protection for whistleblowers in the Commonwealth public sector, as the member for Clark and a number of other people would apparently wish to suggest, there is protection for whistleblowers in the public sector. He should be doing more to create the culture in which there is an understanding of that. Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The Attorney-General has completed his answer. Mr Wilkie C2T Tell that to Richard Boyle. The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The member for Clark has been here long enough—that is not acceptable under the standing orders. He's now warned. I give the call to the member for Hunter. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Hunter shall resume his seat, so I can hear the member for Clark on a point of order. Mr Wilkie C2T A point of order, Mr Speaker. I would ask the Attorney-General to withdraw that reflection on my character. Mr DREYFUS HWG I withdraw. Albanese Government 61 15:08 Mr REPACHOLI 298840 Hunter My question is to the Prime Minister. As the final sitting week of the year comes to a close, what progress has the Australian government made to build Australia's future, and what alternatives are there? 15:08 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the superb member for Hunter, a giant of a man who has made a great difference. But I've got disappointing news for the member for Hunter, because our candidate for Leichhardt is even taller than the member for Hunter and he'll be here next year. I look forward to them sitting next to each other. Over the last fortnight we have been delivering major reforms to make a difference: allowing people to buy a first home; increasing the wages of childcare workers; making things here in Australia through the Future Made in Australia; and protecting children through our legislation for stopping under-16s accessing social media. We are making a difference each and every day. Those opposite, of course, just say no to absolutely everything. I mean, talking to the Leader of the Opposition is like talking to an NPC, a non-player character, because it's just like a bot that does exactly the same thing. The opposition in just the last two weeks have committed to increasing migration by opposing our student caps, to stopping free TAFE, to protecting dodgy private education providers, to preventing Australians buying homes, to blocking more rentals, to keeping student debt high, to stopping Australia making more things here and to privatising the NBN. It's not a bad record in just a fortnight! That is what they have done. And today they have come in here and called for an election to be held in the New Year's week. He has spent all year saying the costings on his nuclear policy are coming next week or next fortnight. The clock's ticking, and it never happens. Tomorrow never comes! And they're not just standing in the way; they want to take things away. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Deakin will cease interjecting. Mr ALBANESE R36 These are things they've said they'll take away: our tax cuts, debt relief, Medicare urgent care clinics, cheaper medicines, investment in renewables, help for people to buy, new rental housing and 'same job, same pay'. All of those things they have said they will take away. The reckless arrogance of those opposite, who haven't got the confidence to put forward a single costed policy, renders them not an alternative government at all, renders them just a reckless, reckless bunch who will not put anything forward. On that note, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper. STATEMENTS 62 STATEMENTS Valedictory 62 15:12 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler As we look back on this year, it is worth reflecting on the great central truth that all of us have an incredible honour in representing our electorates in this place. Each and every day, we should value the privilege that we have of being sent here to make a difference for our fellow Australians. It is a gift and a responsibility given to us by voters, but it's also an extraordinary opportunity to make a difference. I think that, as people leave here for this year, we know that my government has been focused on making a difference, understanding the pressure that so many Australians are under, like people throughout the industrialised world, from global inflation that has made a difference to people 's standard of living. The pressure that people are under is something that was a real focus of all of the leaders at the G20 just last week. The head of the IMF, Kristalina Georgieva, gave a quite extraordinary speech about what happened with COVID, the long tail that occurred and the fact that inflation, which peaked higher and earlier in most of the other advanced economies around the world, had made a real impact on people. Our focus this year has been very much on making a difference helping people with cost-of-living. While we've been doing that, there's been an opportunity as well, through these valedictories, to thank those people who've helped us and helped me. To the caucus, in the words of a great Marrickvillian, my friend Jeff Fenech: I love youse all. That is something he was inclined to say. It was a big year for me. I got engaged in February to Jodie Haydon. Jodie has brought a great deal of light and joy into my life, and when you're doing a job like this with the hours that we work, that is really important. She has a wonderful relationship with a range of people, including across this chamber and around the world. She represents Australia informally, of course, as partners do at events like the G20. She works in such a dignified way and brings a down-to-earth-Australianness. She's a proud coastie, and that shows very much in her attitude and the way that she deals with people. To Nathan, my son, who's growing into a fine young man: thank you for the support and love you give me. It will be his birthday next week, and I look forward to celebrating that. To the deputy PM, my deputy: no-one could hope for a better, more loyal deputy—and a greater friend as deputy. Tomorrow morning, I will be spending time with the Deputy Prime Minister farewelling his mum. It's been a difficult time for Richard, and it will be an honour to be with him tomorrow, not just as Prime Minister but as his friend. To the Leader of the House: it's a fun job being the Leader of the House. It's much better than being Manager of Opposition Business; I've done both. He did have an enjoyable time today as well. Thank you for everything that you do and the counsel that you bring. To the Senate leadership team, Senators Wong and Farrell: you do an extraordinary job in their portfolios of foreign affairs and trade, and you have made a real difference as well. To the Treasurer and finance minister, Jim and Katy: you make such an amazing economic team. We spend a lot of time together in a small room—more than we do with our respective families, it must be said, so apologies to Laura and the kids for that—but Jim and Katy are a crack team together. They are such great mates as well. We spent a lot of time, the three of us, together as well, making sure that we are delivering positive outcomes but we have also done it in a way that has delivered two budget surpluses. The Treasurer can be so proud of that. To all of my frontbench colleagues: thank you for all incredible work that you do. I'm really proud of the ministerial team, but I'm also proud of the extraordinary capacity that we have outside the ministry as well. People work so incredibly hard in this chamber, and I'm sure that is the case right across the parliament. I thank the Leader of the Opposition. Someone said to me the other day: 'It doesn't seem like you hate each other,' and that's absolutely right. In spite of significant ideological differences that we have—there's no point papering over those—we are able to have civil discourse and discussion. I went into the Prime Minister's office once as the Leader of the Opposition. Peter Dutton has been into my office I don't know how many times—too many from my liking probably, and I'm sure far too many for his liking! But this week we had a meeting over an issue. The thing is that when we talk about issues we don't go out and report it. There are some things you have just got to get done in the national interest, be they national security or other issues. I wish you and Kirilly and the family all the very best over Christmas. To Dave—we also get on extremely well. I can confirm that we have actually had a beer in my office. We haven't done that with Peter Dutton, but you would be welcome some time. David, as leader of the National Party, is also someone you can have a confidential discussion with in order to get things done in the national interest and is, I think, someone of real integrity. There are times when he's had an opportunity to have a swing and he hasn't, to his great credit. To all of the crossbench up there—there are a lot of you up there!—during the 17 days before Rob Oakeshott delayed, for 17 minutes, the simple announcement that need to be made, was that, during the period of 2007 to 2010, I engaged with all the crossbench and treated them with respect when we didn't need their vote. We then did need their vote after the 2010 election. I just believe in treating people who are elected to the parliament with respect. Can I make this point as well: there's no member of the Liberal and National parties that has asked to see me that hasn't had a meeting in my office. A range of you have, and I won't give you up and damage your careers by naming you! Over issues, I am always open. Yesterday morning, I had my regular meeting with all the crossbenchers about no issues in particular. We have regular meetings so that they can raise issues with us. All of the crossbenchers, whether they be members of the Greens political party or the Katter's Australian Party or Independents, I engage with with respect in order to get outcomes. Certainly, the outcomes that have been achieved today in the Senate are a direct result of having respectful dialogue and making a difference. To all the people who make this chamber work, the clerks, Hansard, the ushers, everyone who makes this place hum, thank you for what you do. To my AFP detail, it's a bit difficult sometimes when I say to my AFP detail some of the things that we're going to do—going to Woolies to get dog food for Toto or the various things that we do because I like doing some normal things. Life is more difficult. We are in a much more insecure position compared with when I first came into this place. That is unfortunate, but it is a reality that we have to deal with. I know that that's felt by a number of members around here. To the RAAF, who are exceptional—I'll be hosting both the AFP and the RAAF in separate functions at the Lodge in the coming couple of weeks. They provide incredible service and are always cheery and always helpful. To my department, led by Glyn Davis and all the public servants, thank you for what you do. To you, Mr Speaker, I had something to say about this last night our friend Michael McCormack, you do an extraordinary job. I think you're a great Speaker, and you have the respect of the entire chamber in the work that you do. To my personal staff led by Tim Gartrell—to Marika, Bell, Dan and Anna, who look after the more personal aspects of my diary and make sure I get to the right spot; to Fiona and the media team; to Lachie and the social media team, thank you for what you do. To Tim Murray and my electorate office—I don't want to start a debate here, but they've had a really tough time. They have been abused and harassed and had their physical safety threatened. For months, that went on. It is an outrage that that occurred. They continued to provide service for my electorate from the prime ministerial office at the CPO when they had to, when it simply wasn't safe for them to turn up to work. No-one should seek to blame innocent people who are just going about their job to help constituents for a conflict on the other side of the world that they had nothing to do with. But that is what occurred. That's the truth. They do an incredible job. As Prime Minister, I'm obviously busier than a backbench MP. It is difficult to see as many constituents as I used to. My staff have been absolutely amazing. To the press gallery, I'll host them tomorrow night at the Lodge. I had an exchange with Dennis Shanahan from the Australian. He's informed me that he can't come tomorrow night. He's indicated he's glad because people apparently are going to have a swim tomorrow, and no-one wants to see Dennis in budgie smugglers, least of all Dennis! To all in the press gallery, you have a really important job to do in holding all of us to account. I thank you for the work that you do, and I'll have a chance to do that later on. I'll conclude by saying that I do hope everyone gets a break over Christmas. I said that in the caucus earlier on. These jobs are pressure filled, and it is an opportunity to refresh, to engage with family and friends and loved ones, to watch a bit of the cricket and to sit in front of the TV and enjoy that. I hope everyone has a Merry Christmas and a great new year. Just a final thing, as a former transport minister, I'll say it's always really tragic this time of year that there is a spike in road accidents. So slow down, make sure you get there, not get there quicker. That's the important thing. For people who lose a loved one, of course it impacts what should be a joyous time. For people of the Christian faith, Christmas is a really important time as well. For those people of faith, I wish you very much a holy Christmas. It's a time when many people choose to renew their faith and think about what the birth of Jesus Christ means to them. Have a great Christmas. I'll see you in 2025. 15:27 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson I thank the Prime Minister for his warm remarks. I'll start, firstly, by wishing he and Jodie and Nathan and their family a wonderful Christmas, a nice relaxing time and an opportunity to recharge the batteries. This Christmas—and we've already seen some evidence of this—our firefighters will be busy. There will be ambos attending accidents, as the Prime Minister pointed out. Tragically, on our roads and in our backyard swimming pools, terrible events will take place, and we'll be kept safe by those first responders. They will save lives. They will keep our country safe over the Christmas period. I acknowledge their work and their sacrifice, including the amazing men and women of the Australian Defence Force here in Australia and around the world. They work day and night to keep our country and our people safe. Young Australians and older Australians travelling overseas this Christmas will be kept safe because of the work by the people in our embassies, the Australian Defence Force and our intelligence and policing agencies. So I want to say thank you very much for their sacrifice. To them and their families, I hope they have some downtime and time to spend together over the course of this Christmas period. I also want to acknowledge all the veterans who have been acknowledged in different ways during the year. It is a time to say thank you to our veterans, who have served over many successive generations to keep us safe and to allow us to live in the best country in the world. I want to acknowledge in particular this Christmas, and in relation to our veterans, the late Private Richard Norden, who was awarded the Victoria Cross on Remembrance Day. He was finally acknowledged for his battlefield bravery in Vietnam in 1968. We are the beneficiaries of their service and sacrifice, and we are the custodians of their legacy. I want to make a special mention of Australians of Jewish faith this year. They have faced a shocking and unprecedented level of racism and antisemitism in our country, and many kids in Jewish schools have attended those schools over the course of this year with armed guards out the front. That is something completely unacceptable in our society. I commend the Australian people for their resilience over the course of the last 12 months. There are many sites that we visited across the country, including food banks and the Salvation Army, where people are providing support to those less fortunate than ourselves—people who are working hard and yet are still unable to find accommodation. They are living rough, living in their cars and turning up for food packages on a weekly basis. Our thoughts and prayers are with those who are less fortunate and will be separated from their families because of marital breakdown or estrangement of grandparents or others in their family circle. Family celebrations won't be a part of their Christmas, and we acknowledge those Australians this year as well. There are many things we dedicate ourselves to this Christmas, but the betterment of our country in 2025 for the benefit of all Australians is the top of the Christmas wish list this year. I acknowledge all of my colleagues and thank them very much for their hard work and sacrifice. But all members of parliament, including the crossbench, and all of our families make an enormous sacrifice for us to be here. We spend time away from our children. I know that every parent in this place feel that, as many parents and workplaces do across the country. I acknowledge the families—including my own, of Kirilly and our kids—who provide us with so much joy. I'm sure they will this Christmas as well, although they're drinking more at Christmas time, I might note, on their dad's beer tab! That is the case for many families here. I say thanks very much to Simon Birmingham, who has just announced his retirement as our Leader of the Opposition in the Senate. Birmo has a young family, and I know he's going to look forward to spending more time with them. He has given an enormous amount to our country. Thank you to the Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, Michaelia Cash, to my partner in crime, the Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party, Sussan Ley, who has been on this journey with me since 2001. As the Prime Minister said about his deputy, the loyalty and support I receive from Susan is something I deeply cherish. Thank you very much to DLP and all of the Nats for their close collaboration. The work of our coalition has served for the decade, and I'm sure it will into the future. Thank you to Perin Davey and Paul Fletcher, the Leader of Opposition Business in the House, and to our entire team. I congratulate Simon Kennedy, the member for Cook, for his by-election victory in April. I also acknowledge our state colleagues Jeremy Rockliff, Leah Finocchiaro and David Crisafulli, who have taken the reins in their respective jurisdictions and are doing great jobs in Tasmania, the Northern Territory and Queensland respectively. Can I thank Alex Dalgleish, my chief of staff, and Jacqui Cooper, who leads my office in Strathpine in Brisbane. I thank all of my staff for their wonderful work, the sacrifice they make and the time they spend away from their families, helping constituents and people who have queries. We deal with those cases on a daily basis. Thank you so much to the people of Dixon, who give me the great honour of serving in this parliament. And thank you to the Australian Federal Police, who provide support to me and my family, for keeping us safe and for the respectful way that they treat my wife and my children, given that we have so much contact with them. Can I say to the Deputy Prime Minister and to all the ministers on the frontbench: thank you for your service to our country and for the sacrifice that you make. We live in a great country, as I say, and we're very lucky to be here to serve the Australian people. We should never ever forget that that's our priority. To you, Mr Speaker: thank you again—I echo the words of the Prime Minister—for your dedicated service. The way in which you conduct yourself as Speaker of the House is a great credit to you. To you and to your family, to the clerks and to all of those who make parliament work: thank you, and I hope that you're able to spend a joyous Christmas with your families. The most important element of Christmas, of course, is that it's a celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ. To those of Christian faith, I wish you a wonderful Christmas, a happy and merry Christmas, with your families and communities. May it be a safe Christmas for all Australians. We hope that people travel safely over that period and go into 2025 realising their dreams and aspirations in the greatest country on earth. STATEMENT BY THE SPEAKER 65 STATEMENT BY THE SPEAKER Valedictory 65 15:35 The SPEAKER 53517 Before we leave parliament for this year I wish to place on record my thanks on behalf of all of us to the people who've been critical to the workings of the parliament this year—in particular, the Clerk of the House, Claressa Surtees, for her continued and dedicated expert advice she provides me and all members, along with the department she leads. I'd like to give a special shout-out to all the supporting staff: the chamber attendants, Hansard, broadcasting, staff supporting committees and the Serjeant-at-Arms for keeping us safe. Thank you. Thank you to the Department of Parliamentary Services, the people responsible for upholding the integrity of this building: security, building support, cleaners, the catering team and visitor services. To those in the press galleries: as the Prime Minister said, we are lucky to live in a country with a robust press gallery that ensures our words and actions are accurately reported on whether we like it or not. To my colleagues and fellow MPs: thank you for another year of hard work and contributions to this place. Most importantly, thank you for the respect and kindness that you've shown me. Visiting 141 schools across every corner of this country, it's been a joy to see you all working hard in your communities that you love. We all have an important role to play in creating good legislation, maintaining Australia's great democracy and creating a safe and respectful workplace for our nation to see. To the fellow members of the Speaker's panel—particularly the Deputy Speaker, the member for Newcastle: a big thank you for helping me keep this House in order. Sharon, whether it's a cup of tea early in the morning or the sage counsel you provide me, I truly value your professionalism and approach. I also want to thank the Chief Government Whip and the Chief Opposition Whip. Jo and Bert have the hardest jobs, I think, of anyone in the building. They do a remarkable job. Thank you to the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition, the Leader of the Nationals, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and the Leader of the Australian Greens, and thank you to the Manager of Opposition Business and the Leader of the House—two remarkable people with great integrity who I work so closely with. I really want to thank Paul and Tony for their leadership and the work that they do. To members of the crossbench: all of you work collaboratively but you all seem to know exactly when I'm having a tough day in the office, so I thank you for your support. It's been a very busy year for all of us. I hope you all get to have a short break, and I look forward to your interjections back in February when we return—I think. It's a privilege being your Speaker, and I wish all of you and your families a very happy and safe Christmas. PARLIAMENTARY REPRESENTATION 66 PARLIAMENTARY REPRESENTATION Valedictory 66 15:38 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler on indulgence—I would like to pay a short tribute to Simon Birmingham following his announcement of his retirement. He's someone who's been here since 2007. He has served as finance minister and trade minister. I've dealt with him as the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate. He's someone who has very broad respect right across the parliament; he certainly has my personal respect. He also has been into my office on a few occasions. He's someone of integrity who is easy to deal with and who gets things done. It is understandable that he's made this decision. I wish all the very best to Simon, Courtney and their family. CONDOLENCES 66 CONDOLENCES Hughes, Hon. Thomas Eyre Forrest, AO, KC 66 15:39 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler on indulgence—On behalf of the government and the parliament of Australia I rise to honour the life of Thomas Eyre Forrest Hughes. Lucy Turnbull contacted me today to tell me that today Tom has passed away at the ripe old age of 101. I certainly offer our nation's condolences to Tom's family, friends and loved ones including, of course, Lucy and Malcolm Turnbull. Tom Hughes was a brilliant man who lived a life of quite remarkable achievement. He dedicated his talent, intellect and life to the service of our nation. Tom joined the Royal Australian Air Force at the age of 18. He flew a Short Sunderland flying boat patrol bomber and was part of the air support for Allied forces in the invasion of Normandy during D-Day. Tom was awarded the French Legion of Honour for this service—the highest decoration France can bestow. And, like so many members of that greatest of Australian generations, Tom continued to serve his community and his country in peacetime. Just as he fought for freedom from tyranny in war, he championed justice and the rule of law in peace. He built an outstanding and high-profile practice as a member of the New South Wales bar, and then he entered parliament, winning the seat of Parkes in 1963 and then moving to Berowra in 1969. He went on to serve as a widely respected attorney-general in the Gorton government. Tom was someone with a sharp wit and a gift for language and persuasion. More importantly, he held a determination to use his talents for the service of others, for causes bigger than himself. Tom was a giant of the Liberal Party—an icon of the Liberal Party—and was close to people like John Howard and others who came after him. He was a great Australian who was widely respected and who will be mourned in his passing. May he rest in eternal peace. 15:41 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson on indulgence—I thank the Prime Minister for his very gracious words in relation to a great Australian. Tom Hughes, the former member for Berowra, has, sadly, passed away, but at the remarkable age of 101 years. He served at a federal level between 1964 and 1973, and he was many, many things in life. He was a pilot in the Second World War who received the Legion of Honour for his role in the Normandy landings. He was a venerable lion of the Sydney bar who accepted briefs in a principled 'cab on the rank' manner. He was a pragmatic and non-partisan attorney-general whose legal opinions were a hallmark of brevity, clarity and readability. He was an unfailingly loyal Gortonite who admired his Prime Minister and his great friend as an agent of change. He was a grazier who enjoyed winning a stock option almost as much as a case in court. And he was a man known for his profound care for his family, friends, colleagues and clients. Ian Hancock's masterful biography of Tom Hughes finishes by quoting a letter Tom received from a fellow silk, Tom Bathurst, who had just been appointed as Chief Justice of New South Wales. Bathurst wrote to Tom: 'I sought to model myself on you, not only in relation to your outstanding forensic and legal abilities, but also the dignity, honesty and integrity you brought to any matter in which you appeared.' Tom was appointed an Officer of the Order of Australia in 1988. In April, I had the distinct honour of delivering the Tom Hughes Oration at the Sydney Opera House. I saw Tom there, who was frail, and I saw Chrissie, and I extend to her my heartfelt and sincere condolences, as I do to members of the family: to Lucy, to Tom and to Michael, and to the broader family. They had so much respect and admiration for Tom. He was an inspiration, not just to his family but to generations of our Liberal family. There will be an opportunity in due course, I'm sure, to make more fulsome remarks in relation to Tom. But I was speaking with John Howard earlier today, and I know that John had the utmost respect for Tom. They had a close working relationship, and it was a mutual respect for two great men who have contributed so much to our country. I also acknowledge the hurt and grief of the current member for Berowra, who was particularly close to Tom. There was a significant mutual admiration in that friendship as well, and I was texting with Julian earlier to acknowledge the grief and pain that he's experiencing at the moment. But to the Hughes family and to the extended family and friends, who are grieving now, we offer our sincere and heartfelt condolences. He was a wonderful Australian from our greatest generation. May he rest in peace. The 53517 As a mark of respect to the memory of the late Tom Hughes, I ask all present to rise in their places. Honourable members having stood in their places— The SPEAKER 53517 I thank the House. COMMITTEES 67 COMMITTEES Government Response to Report 67 15:44 The 53517 SPEAKER (): For the information of honourable members, I present a schedule of the status of government responses to committee reports as of 26 November 2024. The schedule read as follows— Speaker's Schedule of the Status of Government Responses to Committee Reports The Speaker's schedule to the House of Representatives on the status of government responses to committee reports is presented at six monthly intervals. It is usually presented in the last sitting weeks of the winter and spring sittings. The last schedule was presented in the House on 4 July 2024. The schedule presents a list of committee reports that contain recommendations requiring a government response. Government responses received during the period are included in the schedule and the report it relates to is then removed from subsequent schedules. The timeframe for government responses to committee reports in this schedule is determined by the resolution adopted by the House on 29 September 2010. This resolution requires government responses to House and Joint committee reports within six months of the report's presentation in the House. The Senate resolution requires government responses to Senate and Joint committee reports within three months of tabling the report.[1] This schedule does not list reports that do not require a government response. In the past, the practice was to include all reports tabled in the Speaker's schedule. However, the current intent of this schedule is to provide an update to the House solely on the status of government responses to committee reports containing recommendations to government.[2] The schedule does not include advisory reports on bills introduced into the House of Representatives unless the reports make recommendations that are wider than the provision of the bill and would therefore be the subject of a government response. A government response to a bill inquiry report is reflected when the relevant legislation returns for consideration in the House. The schedule does not include reports from the House of Representatives Committee of Privileges and Members' Interests, and the Publications Committee (other than reports on inquiries). Additionally, reports from the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works (Public Works Committee) were traditionally excluded from the schedule, as government responses were reflected through motions approving works after the presentation of the relevant report. However, starting with this schedule, Public Works Committee reports will now be included for formal tracking when the relevant expediency statement does not address recommendations. This change ensures that Public Works Committee reports requiring a formal government response will be listed alongside other committee reports. Further, the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights' regular scrutiny reports on the human rights compatibility of bills and legislative instruments are not listed, as the timeframe for a response is specified in correspondence to the relevant minister. Reports of the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit primarily make administrative recommendations but may also include policy recommendations, which require a formal government response. Responses to administrative recommendations are made in the form of an Executive Minute provided to, and subsequently tabled by, the committee. Agencies responding to administrative recommendations are required to provide an Executive Minute within six months of the tabling of a report. Executive Minutes are included in this schedule and are listed as (Partial response). The table below provides a summary of government responses received and outstanding to committee reports of the 44th to 47th Parliaments inclusive: The following table lists responses received (since tabling of the last schedule on 4 July 2024) and outstanding (as at 26 November 2024): ————— [1] This practice has arisen from a Senate resolution of 14 March 1973, in which the Senate declared its opinion that the government should provide a response to committee reports within three months of tabling. Successive governments have affirmed their commitment to providing such responses. [2] The Liaison Committee of Chairs and Deputy Chairs agreed at its meeting of June 2023 to recommend removal of all outstanding government responses for House or Joint committee reports presented prior to the commencement of the 46th Parliament (2 July 2019), unless the relevant committee’s successor resolved to retain those reports on the schedule. This schedule is reflective of those removals. [i] The date of tabling is the date the report was presented to the House of Representatives or to the Speaker, whichever is earlier. In the case of joint committees, the date shown is the date of first presentation to either the House or the Senate or to the President or Speaker (if presented earlier out of session). Reports published when the House (or Houses) are not sitting are tabled at a later date. [ii] If the source for the government response date is not the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Representatives or the Journals of the Senate, the source is shown in an endnote. [iii] The Government has undertaken to respond to committee reports within a six-month period—see House of Representatives Standing Orders, resolution of the House of Representatives of 29 September 2010. This resolution also puts in place additional steps for reports not responded to within that six-month period. The period from when the 44th Parliament was prorogued on 9 May 2016 to the commencement of the 45th Parliament on 30 August 2016 is not included in the response period. The period from when the 45th Parliament was prorogued on 11 April 2019 to the commencement of the 46th Parliament on 2 July 2019 is not included in the response period. The period from when the 46th Parliament was prorogued on 11 April 2022 to the commencement of the 47th Parliament on 26 July 2022 is not included in the response period. [iv] On 1 July 2023, the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity (ACLEI) transitioned into the new National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC). Accordingly, the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity ceased to exist. The oversight of the NACC is undertaken as of that date by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the National Anti-Corruption Commission. [v] Public Works Committee recommendations are typically addressed through the expediency statement when the House approves the public work. In instances where the expediency statement does not address these recommendations, the Public Works Committee reports will now be included in the Speaker’s schedule for formal tracking and response. [*] Presented out of session DOCUMENTS 73 DOCUMENTS Presentation 73 15:44 Mr BURKE DYW Watson Documents are tabled in accordance with the list circulated to honourable members earlier today. Full details of the documents will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings. BUSINESS 73 BUSINESS Leave of Absence 73 15:45 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I move: That leave of absence be given to every member of the House of Representatives from the determination of this sitting of the house to the date of its next sitting. Question agreed to. MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE 73 MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE Labor Government 73 15:45 The SPEAKER 53517 I've received a letter from the honourable the Leader of the Nationals proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely: This Prime Minister taking Australia in the wrong direction. 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— 15:45 Mr LITTLEPROUD 265585 Maranoa I ask you to cast your mind back to election it when the Prime Minister said, 'No-one will be held back, no-one will be left behind.' Bring yourself forward 2½ years, and Australians are now asking themselves: do they really feel better off after 2½ years of Anthony Albanese? After those 2½ years, the country has clearly gone in one direction—one where he has divided a country and sent us broke. We got a real insight into that in just under 12 months, when he decided to take the country down a path of the Voice referendum, dividing this nation. He told us that he was going to spend over $450 million on a referendum without even going through the proper process of calling a constitutional convention, bringing all Australians together, because the Constitution is owned by every Australian. Instead he told us that we're going to repeat the mistakes of the past by bringing back ATSIC Mark 2—not changing the livelihoods of regional Indigenous Australians but repeating those mistakes. Australians saw through it. Instead of listening to the Australian people after that referendum, the Prime Minister did nothing. The only action to take place—and it was, in fact, the very week after that referendum—was that taken by the Leader of the Opposition and I. We came to this place, and we heard that the result of that referendum was that they didn't want more bureaucracy. They wanted a better bureaucracy, and they wanted action. So we introduced in this place two pieces of legislation. One was around a royal commission into child sexual abuse in Central Australia, and the second was about an audit to ensure that the over $4 billion that's being spent by Australian taxpayers in the expectation that we will close the gap for the most marginalised in this country is being spent wisely. That's common sense. But this government could not even bring themselves to respect the result of the referendum and listen to the voices of the Australian people about the action that they wanted. Instead, they turned their back on it and, since then, have barely uttered one word about Indigenous Australians. They wasted $450 million that could have helped close the gap with practical solutions. They wasted Australian taxpayers' money, and all it ended up being was a vibe. The government's economic management continues to put pressure on Australian families. Some Australian families tonight will not be able to afford dinner. In a country as rich as Australia, in a country of 27 million people that produces enough food and fibre for 80 million, that is a national shame. It's a shame because what this government has done is continue to spend Australian taxpayers' money because their belief in their ideology hasn't met the practical reality of addressing the fundamentals of what's keeping your interest rates higher: the fact that inflation is staying higher. Discretionary spends have stopped. We've stopped going to Gerry Harvey and buying TVs and fridges because we can't afford it, but your fixed spending continues to go up because those opposite—this government—after 2½ years have failed to acknowledge that they have to address the fundamentals. If you look at where the fixed spending continues to remain high and continues to increase, it's in energy, food and rents. That has kept inflation higher, which means your interest rates have remained higher. In fact, the average mortgage in this country has gone up an extra $35,000. So $35,000 has ben ripped out of Australian families' wallets because of the mismanagement of this government. They haven't been prepared to face up to the fact that the ideology around shifting to an all-renewables approach for an energy grid cannot work. There's no country of the industrial scale and size of Australia that has gone with an all-renewables approach. Instead, they have sent investment signals that have reduced our baseload supply, driven up prices and take away confidence not just in households but also in the industry. Manufacturing cannot continue to be subsidised to keep going. To have manufacturing in this country you have to fix fundamentals. You have to have affordable and reliable baseload power and you have to have proper industrial relations policy. This government's failed on both. But, then, because they understood that households were copping it in the neck because of their promise of a $275 reduction in electricity bills for households that was never going to be seen—in fact, we have seen an increase of over $800—they had to do something about it. What they did is spend $6.5 billion of Australian taxpayer dollars in papering over cracks and to say, 'We're not going to fix the fundamentals; we're just going to buy ourselves out of trouble politically.' There was a politician up in my home state of Queensland who did that about three months ago—Steven Miles. He had a closing down sale in Queensland. He gave the show away. He gave everything away in a crude attempt to hold power. That is what this government is doing. They are giving it all away. They're now dipping into your Future Fund because of their economic mismanagement. In fact, they still can't face up to those fundamentals of inflation, and we're seeing poor inflation. That real number that the RBA governor uses to determine where rates will go went up last month from 3.2 to 3.5 per cent. The RBA governor only acts in reaction to the actions of this government, and the reckless spending of this government continues to put pressure on the RBA governor. That is putting pressure on households and putting pressure on businesses. In fact, things are so bad out there at the moment that we are seeing over 20,000 small-business insolvencies. They employ mums and dads that are trying to pay their mortgages. They have lost their livelihoods and businesses. They've had to sweat and have the courage of their own convictions to go and start a business and employ people, and now they have lost it and had to let their employees go. You can see that what is happening out there in this economy is that this government is ramming this economy into a wall. The RBA governor is now in a state of flux about what to do. They cannot control inflation, but they are sending the economy dead broke. This is the challenge that Australians are feeling today. When you think about the central policies that will address the fundamentals, they include having an all-energy mix, not putting all our energy eggs in one basket. We have sovereignty of all our resources. That will address the energy prices that you are receiving now. If you want to bring them down quicker, get some more gas into the supply quickly. You can get gas into the grid quickly. That will bring food prices down. Food processors are paying three to sometimes four times what they were two to three years ago. The bill that the government brought in today around the big tough penalties they're bringing in for supermarkets is business as usual. They're bringing in infringement notices to tell the supermarkets that they are treating farmers and also consumers poorly to a maximum of $187,800. If I whip down to Civic here and go to one of their stores, I could pull that out of the till. That's just a cost of doing business. Supermarkets do not fear these people. When you see Australians who, tonight, will struggle to put food on the table, why wouldn't you do something about it? Those are the real policy levers you can pull that don't cost a cent. They would put downward pressure on prices. You've also got to give Australians the hope of one day fulfilling that dream of owning a home. This crowd are bringing 1.67 million people into this country. That is a city bigger than the size of Adelaide. They are bringing in dog groomers and martial arts instructors instead of maybe thinking about bringing in some builders, sparkies, roofers and tilers. If you're going to bring that number in, you're going to have to build some homes. What's happened is young people have lost hope. They've lost hope of ever owning a home, because it's all about supply. While building that supply sits with state and local government, the levers that we pull in this place help them. If you're going to not have the commonsense solution around migration to bring in—because we should determine who comes the country, the skills they have and where we want them to live. We're giving those people around planet the greatest gift we give anybody: a ticket to Australia. Our coalition, if we become government after the next election, will ban foreigners from competing with Australians for residential options for two years. We're going to put a pause on this increase in building standards going up to seven stars, lifting the cost of building a home by over $60,000. No wonder no-one can afford it. We've got to get back to some basics, get back to understanding we've been given the privilege of spending Australian taxpayers' money. We've got to do it properly and to pull the policy levers that will actually do the lifting rather than having to spend Australian taxpayers' money, because, ultimately, Australians can't afford another three more years of Anthony Albanese. 15:56 Ms McBAIN 281988 Eden-Monaro It's a pleasure to respond to this MPI, because what we have heard is that basically those opposite gave up. After nine years, they said: 'We're out of ideas. We can't do anymore rorts. We've gone through every colour coded spreadsheet we can find, and we still can't make a difference in Australians' lives.' That is why in 2022 the population voted for change and voted for an Albanese Labor government. We as a government are building Australia's future because we understand the importance of having a strong direction for our country—something that those opposite still don't have in opposition. They still don't have a single costed policy. There is no detail about their nuclear thought bubble. They are determined to hold people back. Since we came to government, we've got wages moving again after a decade of deliberately holding wages low. We have tackled inflation and we have delivered two budget surpluses without wasting money on 'back in black' mugs for a surplus that didn't happen under those opposite. We've made medicines cheaper, we've boosted bulk-billing, we've strengthened Medicare and we've increased regional health services. If it was up to those opposite, cost-of-living relief wouldn't actually be a thing, because they're determined to block every measure that we've put forward, without a single alternative solution. We have delivered a tax cut for every Australian, something that—you guessed it—those opposite voted against. We have expanded paid parental leave and will also pay superannuation on it, because taking time out to care for your children shouldn't leave you worse off. Our energy bill relief is rolling out, which, let's not forget, we implemented because the shadow Treasurer deliberately changed the law to hide electricity bill increases until after the 2022 election. From 1 July, 2.6 million minimum and award wage workers received a pay rise—the third consecutive pay rise increase under our government—because Labor will always stand up for workers and their rights. Aged-care workers, childcare workers and other workers low-paid industries—and that's on top of our record aged-care and childcare worker pay rises reducing pressure on some of our most valued workers, who are in professions that have been overlooked for too long under those opposite. Every regional community that I visit tells me the same thing: 'We need more housing to attract and retain the workers that we need.' And let me be clear: housing was not an issue that didn't exist before 2022. It was just that on this side of the House we actually recognised that, as the federal government, we had a role to play in it. That's why our government has invested $32 billion in housing initiatives, the biggest investment in a decade. It will ensure we get more homes off the ground in our regions. We've already seen more than 13,000 people now have homeownership under our regional first home buyer grant, because we expanded the eligibility criteria. We've announced under round 1 of the Housing Australia Future Fund more than 13,000 homes. That's more than we saw in an entire decade, because you actually have to put money where your mouth is and get on with delivering. Our $1.5 billion Housing Support Program is supporting local governments and state and territory governments to build enabling infrastructure, because councils told us that they needed more help getting the groundwork done. Fifty million dollars is already flowing to 80 projects across Australia under stream 1, including 73 local council projects aimed at boosting planning capabilities, and just this week our Help to Buy legislation passed parliament, something those opposite in bed with the Greens voted against time and time again. This will now help 40,000 low-and middle-income earners turn the keys on their own property. That's nurses; that's cleaners; that's carers; that's childcare workers. Something else our regional communities tell me all the time is that they need more help to repair and maintain roads across their council areas because for a decade, under those opposite, roads were literally driven into the ground. That's why we're progressively doubling Roads to Recovery over the next five years to a billion dollars annually. In the Leader of the Nationals' own electorate, that's more than $156 million over the next five years—an increase of $49 million. Just today, I met with one of the councils from the Maranoa electorate—Murweh Shire Council—and they will receive $10.7 million in Roads to Recovery, which is an increase of $3.4 million. I can tell you what they're saying: that this funding increase is not moving in the wrong direction; it's finally moving in the right direction. What they did say, though, was that our ongoing commitment to regional aviation is incredibly important for places like the Charleville Airport. Our $80 million investment to keep Rex's regional routes running shows we understand the importance of a strong regional aviation network. It keeps people connected. It keeps our businesses running and it ensures our regional communities thrive. Just like roads, the opposition did nothing for the regional aviation sector in their decade in government. Cancellations and delays are their only MO. But not everyone can travel by air, which is why we've increased a range of road programs including $437 million just announced for 230 priority upgrades across New South Wales, many in our regional areas. In my own electorate of Eden-Monaro, that's over $50 million to 16 projects. The road Black Spot Program is increasing from $110 million a year to $150 million a year, meaning more money for improving some of the most dangerous sections of our roads. We've launched the new Safer Local Roads and Infrastructure Program, which is a $200 million program annually, and we delivered an additional $250 million to regional councils through phase 4 of the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program. These programs not only make our roads safer; they make it easier for people to get around. Those opposite wouldn't know the right direction for this country if it was screaming out at them from a map, but a paper map is probably all you'd get from the opposition because they're determined to hold Australia back when it comes to digital connectivity, too. They bungled the rollout of the NBN with their deliberate underinvestment, and just 15 minutes down the road from here in my own electorate, half of some of the streets were stuck on the coalition's copper network for a decade while the other half had fibre to the premise under the previous Labor government. We have now fixed that with an investment of $2.4 billion to expand full-fibre NBN, including to 660,000 homes in our regions. Now they're looking to sell off the NBN to the lowest bidder because they're the party of privatisation, and, as the mayor of Flinders Ranges Council said, the first thing that goes under privatisation is service. We're a government that understands the value of investing in people and supporting them to build their own futures. We're supporting people to train at home so they can continue working locally because you shouldn't have to pack your bags to build a career. Our fee-free TAFE has already supported 500,000 people nationally, including over 127,000 people in our regions; 35,000 in construction courses and the same amount in early education; 50,000 in digital technology; 130,000 in aged care and disability care. This is a program that we'll make permanent because it's hugely successful. The Australian Council of Trade Unions said fee-free TAFE is making education more affordable and accessible, easing pressure on household budgets and ensuring more young people have the financial freedom to pursue their dreams. But the opposition, yet again at odds with the community, are now standing in the way of people's futures. Just last week, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition said, 'if you don't pay for it, you don't value it'. Well, tell that to the apprentice chef that said, 'I'm going to school to get a better job so we can have a better life'; or the student nurse that said, 'It gives a lot of young people and older people an opportunity.' This reckless disregard for people and what they need is the approach that those opposite took to Medicare and to the NDIS—they gutted both. But under an Albanese Labor government, we're delivering record investments to rebuild that damage, including an increase to the bulk billing incentive, cheaper medicines and 29 additional urgent care clinics in our most recent budget alone, including one in my own electorate on Morisset Street in Queanbeyan. As we enter our high-risk weather season—let's talk about the wrong direction, eh?—having been through the devastating Black Summer bushfires with my communities in the Bega Valley, I know the consequences of turning your back on disaster preparedness, which is exactly what we saw under those opposite. That is why we have set up the National Emergency Management Agency, to ensure that we have a coordinated approach when we need it. We have built the largest firefighting air fleet in the country's history, with 160 aircraft positioned across the country to protect our communities. And we established the $1 billion Disaster Ready Fund to invest in disaster resilience and risk reduction. Backwards is the only direction this country would be heading under the reckless approach by the Leader of the Opposition, Peter Dutton, and his 'no-alition'. We will continue to build Australia 's future on this side of the House and stand up for communities right across the country. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 I'm just going to remind the minister and all speakers thereafter when referring to people who are members in this place, you must use their correct titles. 16:06 Mr HOGAN 218019 Page Australia is heading in the wrong direction. I'm saying that but it is not just me saying that. Deputy Speaker, do you know who is saying that? The majority of the Australian people are saying that. When people are polled and asked: do you think Australia is heading in the wrong direction, the majority of people, the vast majority, a significant majority of people, are saying yes, and that has changed over the period in the last 12 to 18 months. The majority of people have decided that Australia is heading in the wrong direction. Why would they say that? Why do you think they would say that? There is obviously great disappointment in the government, all of you over there are representing that government, and the majority of people in Australia think you are sending this country in the wrong direction. Why would they think that? Why would they be saying that? One of the reasons, obviously, is cost of living. The figure that has been quoted over here a lot, which has been analysed by independent people—not a figure that we made up—is that the average family is $35,000 a year worse off, and $20,000 of that is because of the 12 interest rate increases we've seen from the other side. So the average mortgage is more than $20,000 what it was when those opposite came to government. Of course, we have increases in energy costs, increases in groceries. We just had an increase in everything that people buy and sell. Mr HOGAN 218019 I'm getting interjections over there all the time from the member for Hasluck, who I think will be a one-term member because people aren't happy in her electorate either. Do you know why they are unhappy with the member for Hasluck and with many others? They are unhappy because this government didn't have a focus for a long time. For the first 18 months they were talking about a Voice, which divided the country, divided families, divided friendship groups. They were focused on that while interest rates were going up, they were focused on that while food prices were going up and they were focused on that while energy costs were going up. Just over the last week or two, what was the main game of those opposite? They weren't talking about cost of living; they were talking about a misinformation bill. That was a big focus for them and that is what they wanted to push through. What was that going to do? It would shut down free speech in this country. That is all it was going to do. If you had an opinion that disagreed with them they were not going to let you wear it. Mr HOGAN 218019 The member for Hasluck, keep interjecting because you are not going to have many more opportunities. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 I would ask you not to encourage the interjections and I am going to ask the member for Hasluck, who I often have to ask, not to interject. Let 's get through this debate, the last one for the year. Over to you, member for Page. Mr HOGAN 218019 They focused on the Voice to divide our country, focused on the misinformation bill to shut down free speech in this country. That is what the government is focused on while we are heading in the wrong direction. As a regional MP, I certainly feel this. Regional Australia certainly knows this government is not going in the correct direction. I remind this House that regional Australia is the economic powerhouse of this country. A lot of our city cousins, I don't think, appreciate that. The four biggest exports in this country are coal, iron ore, gas and food. None of that comes from a city seat. Deputy Speaker, as a regional MP, you would certainly appreciate that none of that comes from a city seat. Regional Australia is driving the wealth of this country, but that's certainly not how this government treats regional Australia. We've seen so many infrastructure programs shut down. The Stronger Communities program was a favourite of mine, for the little community groups that it would help out: $10,000 or $15,000 for a little community group. It was a great program in regional Australia. Obviously every person on that side didn't want that, because it disappeared. Another great program was the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program. It has been abandoned under this government. Another decision that was very detrimental to regional Australia was the Murray-Darling Basin Plan, where we've seen this government basically commit to take water out of communities, which takes jobs out of communities and takes food out of communities. That hasn't been a good direction for our country. And the other one—we spent a whole MPI on it—is the reckless renewables policy of this government. In sanctimonious-hypocrisy corner over there we have the member for Warringah, who doesn't want eight wind turbines and a hectare of solar panels on North Head, but gee, it's okay to build millions of solar panels and tens of thousands of wind turbines out in the regions, because apparently we don't have culturally or environmentally significant issues with that. I could go on about health—the Distribution Priority Areas, which ravaged GPs from the regions as well. The Australian public is right: this government is putting Australia in the wrong direction. (Time expired) 16:11 Ms MASCARENHAS 298800 Swan It's really interesting, standing in this place and getting lectured about directions. I think quite a lot of people would know what I mean when I say, 'Never eat soggy Weet-bix'—north, east, south, west. One of the reasons I talk about that is that I think it's important to think about compasses, including moral compasses. So it's really fascinating getting lectured by the opposition about a sense of direction, particularly when we had a member for Cook who didn't have a particularly good moral compass. I think multiple people from his side referred to him as a liar, and international leaders described— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Member for Swan, I understand that you may be quoting, but that is an unparliamentary term. Ms MASCARENHAS 298800 Okay. Thank you very much, Deputy Speaker. The thing I would say is that there were five secret ministries, and they were ministries that nobody knew about. So, it was really interesting to hear them talk about that sense of direction. I remember the days when we didn't have GPSs, and I feel as though sometimes the Nationals are using a paper street directory, sometimes known as a UBD. But I think that's a TLA that this generation doesn't necessarily know. But when we're talking about directions, I think it's important that we look at the megatrends that are happening in our economy at the moment, such as inflation, which is a really important issue for all households. When we took office, the inflation rate had a six in front of it, and at the moment it has a two in front of it. Also, talking about numbers, because I'm kind of into numbers: a tax cut for every taxpayer. I talk about that because it's something I see as being tangibly important to all Australians. But I also kind of want to give a lesson on systems thinking. In our economy there are big systems, feedback loops, input parameters, time lags and input variables. There's no definitive science to this, but something that was really exciting to me was when I went and visited St Vinnies in my electorate of Swan and they showed me statistics on the number of phone calls they get from people in the community who are facing financial hardship. I saw a significant reduction, from July this year, in the number of people seeking assistance. That indicated to me that our tax cuts are having an impact, and so is our electricity relief credit. But you need to look at multiple numbers. I also had a NAB team member come and visit me, and he was talking about the stats they were seeing in their office. They've also seen a reduction in the number of people seeking hardship terms. So we're starting to see the change that Australians need. Also, speaking of directions, one of the things that was interesting for me when I was at the Canning show was the unsolicited feedback on federal government policy that I got when I was speaking to a couple of different constituents. Some of it was on robodebt. A young man said to me, 'I could never vote for the coalition, because of the mental trauma that they put me through.' An air hostess manager said: 'Hey dude, how are you going? We're totally supporting you, and that's because of Same Job, Same Pay.' She asked, 'Did you know that someone that's doing the same job as me can be paid $50,000 more?' Same job and, previously, not the same pay: does that sound fair? If I think about Australia, I think of it as a country that's about fairness. When people think about Australia as a place to come to, they think about the things that make it better: a good industrial relations system; a good Medicare system, which we will continue to invest in; and a good education system, which is something Labor governments are amazing at supporting. I spoke to another person about the culture of Centrelink. He said, 'When you guys took over, it felt like there was a change in the culture when I walked in the door within the actual Centrelink office.' We need to take pride in our institutions and continue to work really hard to make sure that we make a positive difference for everyday Australians. 16:16 Ms PRICE 249308 Durack There is no doubt that Australians are worse off under this Prime Minister. Since the election, the cost of food has gone up by 11.8 per cent. The cost of housing has gone up by 11.7 per cent and rents are up by 16.1 per cent. Gas prices are up by a whopping 32.2 per cent. Health care costs are up by 10.4 per cent, education by 11.5 per cent and financial and insurance services by 18.2 per cent. As you can see, everything's going up, and Australians want action. They do feel that they've been let down by this Albanese government. The good people of WA really feel let down. In particular, the people living in regional WA feel let down. There's been a lot of chatter about when the election will be and whether or not we'll be coming back in February. I'm sure the Prime Minister's receiving a lot of feedback from his colleagues about when he should go. No matter what date he lands on, Australians will still be faced with the same question of whether they are better off now than they were three years ago. It's that question which must really frighten those opposite. It's noteworthy that they've stacked the MPI with the Western Australians today. How worried are they about the result in WA? In question time yesterday, I asked the Prime Minister about the terrible collapse of living standards in Australia. This is what my constituents, like all Australians, care about. It was interesting to hear him bring up his recent trip to Geraldton, which is in my wonderful electorate of Durack. In that question, he failed to mention that he was in Geraldton for only one hour. Honestly, it's a real shame that the Prime Minister didn't take the opportunity to hear from the Geraldton locals about the real issues for them. He didn't want to hear about the housing crisis or the cost-of-living crisis. He didn't want to hear about any of that. No, it was simply a photo opportunity. That is absolutely disgusting, and how disrespectful to the people of Geraldton. Christmas is less than a month away but, yet again, it's going to look a lot different this year. This Christmas, Australians will be forced to cut back on their spending whilst seeing this government spend, spend and spend a little bit more. Unfortunately, this means fewer presents under the tree for our children to open on Christmas Day. There aren't going to be a lot of those long, expensive family holidays during January, which would otherwise have been a source of wonderful, treasured memories. As we approach the new year, families are needing to reconsider school options, and I'm hearing about this across the electorate. They're reconsidering whether they can continue to pay for their children's sports. These are real issues. After 2½ years of this government, this is beginning to, unfortunately, look like the new normal. In Australia, core inflation is rising, and it is higher than in any other major advanced economy. This demonstrates that inflation is homegrown and that, out of all of the leaders of the advanced economies, ours has delivered the worst results. The election will certainly be an uphill battle for the coalition; we recognise that. Not since 1931 has a Commonwealth government failed to win a second term. Yet, despite history being on Labor's side, I think you'd struggle to find anyone in the government feeling absolutely certain about their chances or really positive about their future as a member of parliament. They know they're failing, and they know that Australians know it. In 2022 Labor campaigned on making life easier and cheaper for Australians. This Prime Minister and his government have been in charge now for over 2½ years, yet those opposite refuse to accept any responsibility for Australia's ongoing high inflation. It is simply shameful. They would have you believe that high energy prices have nothing to do their renewable-only strategy; they'd have you believe that inflation has nothing to do with their spending of $315 billion; and they'd have you believe that business insolvencies hitting an all-time record high had nothing to do with their industrial relations changes, which only make it harder to do business in this country. I would like to conclude by addressing some serious fires that are currently being battled around my electorate of Durack. One such fire is in the Shire of Toodyay. I believe the people of West Toodyay are currently under the 'leave now' bushfire warning. Another very serious fire is in the Shire of Dandaragan, around Cervantes; it is approximately 48 kilometres long, north to south, and is proving very difficult to combat. It's my understanding that there are over 200 firefighters working tirelessly to get this under control. I would like to thank them all. I would like to extend my heartfelt thoughts to everyone impacted by these fires, including the two firefighters who were injured yesterday during the Dandaragan fire. Be safe, everyone. (Time expired) 16:21 Mr BURNELL 300129 Spence The matter put before the House today refers to the direction Australia is moving in, so let's talk about that. Let's talk about the direction this country will be moving in under the nuclear energy policy proposed by the LNP—or I wish I could say that, because the opposition don't really have one. They don't know what they're doing. We have six pages of nothing, which were given to the Australian public over six months ago, but that's been discreetly taken down, to the point where you can't access it anymore online. If you need a copy, please reach out to my office; we're more than happy to provide one. The Liberals did that because they realised there was a problem with their nuclear energy policy: they don't know how much it's going to cost, they don't know how long it's going to take, they don't know what these reactors will look like, they don't know what kind of nuclear reactors they want to build, and they don't know how much nuclear waste this policy will produce. Is it a Coke can? I think not. They don't know how their nuclear policy is going to help Australians. They're not telling us about the supposed savings Aussie families will get, and I would go as far as to say that the opposition don't know why they're heading in this direction, because, outside of taking advantage of Aussies who need help with the cost of living and trying to capitalise on their suffering for the express purpose of winning Liberal votes, there is absolutely no reason to think, and it is grounded in absolutely no scientific evidence, that this direction of the coalition—if you can call it that—is going to achieve anything in Australia, given our current position in energy. The LNP's nuclear policy is pure fantasy. The member for Fairfax—who is the main character on this 'wheel of fortune policy' from the LNP—must have seen Wicked the other day, because the nuclear snake oil he is peddling to the public is straight out of a scene from The Wizard of Oz. The member for Fairfax is playing the role of Dorothy, following the 'yellowcake road'. He is followed closely by little Toto, played by the member for Cook. They're off to see the wizard, the wonderful wizard of half-baked ideas and destruction—played by this opposition leader. The member for Fairfax has asked the wizard to grant him his heart's desire. His wish is for some direction on energy policy. The opposition leader, with a twist and a flick of his magic wand, grants that wish by handing down a nuclear energy policy that costs too much, takes too long and annihilates Australia's path to cheaper power bills and cleaner energy because the wizard thinks it'll earn him some blue votes next year. But the member for Fairfax doesn't care. With the member for Cook in his arms, he taps his heels three times and teleports all around the country, riding the high of Aussies struggling to pay their bills, and presents them with the sheer fiction that is their nuclear policy. That is the direction of the Liberals—they are absolutely aimless. That's why this Labor government, under this Prime Minister, has spent the last 2½ years getting Australia back on track. Labor's direction is fighting the cost of living, and we delivered a bigger, better and fairer tax cut for every Australian to do just that. Those Australians include 67,000 people in my electorate alone on lower and middle incomes, keeping more of what they earn than under the Liberal plan. Labor's direction is smashing barriers of disadvantage in communities like mine, by making education more affordable. That includes a brand new university study hub opening Elizabeth to slash expenses for local students, changing the student loan system so you're paying loans off when you can afford to do so and fee-free TAFE. Labor has enrolled over half a million Aussies into TAFE, for free. If re-elected next year, we will cut 20 per cent off all HELP loans for students. Labor's direction is making medicines cheaper and health care more affordable. Labor's direction is keeping inflation down to put downward pressure on costs in the family home. And, of course, Labor's direction is staying away from the 'yellowcake road' and actually doing something to make power prices cheaper. We have done that by taking $300 of all power bills for every single Australian household. While the Liberals are busy chasing wizards projecting their magical fantasies onto Australians and attempting to block everything I just mentioned because they want to profit from Aussies doing it tough, this Labor government under this Prime Minister is going the right direction—that is, fighting the cost of living. 16:26 Mr WOLAHAN 235654 Menzies There are times in our lives when we stop. We pause and ask: what was the point of it all? We usually do that at significant moments in history or in our lives. The member for Canning and I asked ourselves that question at the end of the Afghanistan war: what was the point of it all? When you do that, you do a serious stocktake of what occurred and what we learned from it. Right now, Australians are standing at a crossroads, looking at this Prime Minister and this government and they're saying, 'What was the point of it all?' When I listen through the various speeches given by the members, with due respect them as friends and colleagues, I also ask: what was the point of it all? We have heard lovely speeches given for the people who keep this place ticking—our staff, families and friends, as we should. We did that because Christmas is coming. We owe a great debt to the Australian people. We want them to know that, in this place, we're thinking of them as well with Christmas around the corner. Many families will be having a Christmas they didn't have three years ago. They will be poorer, more stressed, harder-working and less happy. That is on this government because, when you look at the numbers, Australians are going backwards. Everyone is going backwards, bar a few exceptions. Recently our leader came to a foodbank in my electorate. Went there for two reasons—one was to thank the volunteers and donors for all that they do. We were at Carenet in Templestowe, and I want to thank Kellie Wishart and her team. Templestowe is not an area, if you're from Melbourne, that you would imagine needing a foodbank. It is generally considered a wealthy area, with high incomes and high asset prices, yet in that area they're giving out 4,000 kilograms a week of food. Our first task was to thank the volunteers for their work. The second task, many people asked about in the comments in the leader's posts and in mine. They asked: what are you going to give them? That's not the right question. The question is: what are we going to do to make the need for this foodbank disappear? We are prosperous nation, and it is a great shame on us that so many Australians are turning up to foodbanks. How is it happening that, in 2024, Australians in metropolitan Melbourne are putting food on the table from foodbanks? I went to that foodbank on a previous occasion. As I stood there talking to Kellie Wishart, some people were coming in and I recognised some of them. They felt embarrassed, but they shouldn't have because I know that they are hardworking and they have had circumstances in their lives—whether it be unemployment, a separation or illness—that has meant they are struggling and need that help. Families this Christmas will go to pay the food bill, with the average food bill for a family of four about $400 a week. It has gone up 10 per cent. At Christmas, when you want to put a bit of extra food on the table, it can be double that cost. Housing is up; rents are up. When we listen to the interjections or the speeches, all we hear is, 'Yes, we've caused this great problem that we're not interested in solving, but here is our little bit of help for the symptoms.' There is no interest in the cause. They are only focused on the symptoms and helping to start a fire that they are not interested in putting out. Here is my little bucket of water to help put it out—that is the focus of this government. It's all symptoms, no cause. Families paying off a mortgage are in dire straits. A family with an average mortgage is $35,000 worse off. That's for the average mortgage. The closer you get to metropolitan Melbourne—I see that the member for Higgins is here—you know that the average mortgage is way higher than that. Families who are on average wages see no hope, and many are at the brink. Again, we hear the government talk about average wages. They never talk about real wages, and how much money is actually left in people's pockets at the end of all the costs they have to pay that are going up and the rising income taxes through bracket creep. So Australians at this crossroads are saying, 'What was the point of it all?' They will pass judgement soon. (Time expired) 16:31 Dr ANANDA-RAJAH 290544 Higgins I have learned one thing in life, which is that you judge people not on what they say but on what they actually do. For all the chirping, bleating and, frankly, crocodile tears from the coalition, the Liberals and the Nationals, we know that at every turn they have opposed our offerings to improve the lives of Australians and to help with cost-of-living relief. They have opposed energy bill relief, wage increases amongst our lowest paid workers and Commonwealth rent assistance. There is not a single aspect or component of our cost-of-living relief package that they haven't opposed. When we came to government, we inherited a really bad hand of economic cards, and this was after a decade of the Liberals and Nationals in action. We basically found an economy with its shock absorbers ripped out when it came to housing, energy and skills. We had economy-wide shortages of skills; nothing had been done about this. We also had the really bad label of being the lowest country in the OECD when it came to sovereign manufacturing capability. We just simply stopped making things in Australia. That was the economy we inherited. Then, to make matters worse, during the pandemic we had JobKeeper, which basically injected, turbocharged, nearly $90 billion in funding to businesses. We didn't quibble with that at the time, but, when you look back in the rearview mirror, the reality is $38 billion of that went to companies with increasing profits. What it did was actually pour fuel on this inflationary fire. So we have woken up from this pandemic with a very heavy inflationary hangover that was not helped by what we inherited from those opposite. For the duration of this government, we have tried to respond with support—not with austerity and not with making things worse but with actual, material support—to help the Australian people throughout the lifetime continuum, from the cradle to the grave. When I talk about the cradle, I'm referring, of course, to the early years. For the first time in the Commonwealth's history, we have an early years strategy, and that was backed in with cheaper child care. When we came to government, we found that childcare costs had actually increased 49 per cent over the decade that the Liberals were in power. That was most acutely felt in my own electorate. Higgins has the highest childcare fees of any Victorian electorate. After your mortgage and your car, child care is the next biggest expense. So we injected $5 billion. It came in our first budget, and it's helped to take off some of the pressure on families. This week, while it was opposed by those opposite, we passed a 15 per cent wage increase for early childhood educators, because we cannot support this vital industry without the workers. On a really positive note, we've also injected more money into toy libraries. Not only are these really important community assets; they also ease the pressure on families during a really tough period. They don't have to waste their money buying expensive toys. They simply need to go to their community toy library. We’ve backed those in. When it comes to the middle years, this week we increased public school funding—the highest in Commonwealth history. We have linked this to KPIs which are meaningful, such as improved phonics and numeracy benchmarks, improved mental health support for Australian kids and professional development for teachers. This is designed to lift standards right across our public school education sector, something that the Liberals never talked about. They never, ever talked about it when they were in government. To back that in and to protect the mental health of our children, this week we banned social media. We imposed age limits on social media. Admittedly, this was done with bipartisan support, and we thank those opposite. In terms of post-secondary-school education, perhaps this is where we will have the biggest impact. We have delivered a full suite of reforms to slash HECS debt to make it fairer and to really invest in free TAFE, which those opposite have opposed. That is completely inexplicable given the skill shortages this country was facing and continues to face. 16:36 Mr VIOLI 300147 Casey It's good to hear the member for Higgins talk about mental health, and it is great that we have instigated the social media ban. It's a little bit disappointing we didn't hear her speak out when her government slashed the number of Medicare funded mental health sessions from 20 to 10, despite the reports saying that it should stay at 20. That is just one of many examples that I will talk about. The Albanese Labor government is heading in the wrong direction and letting down the Australian people. It is clear. If you speak to anyone in the community, there is not one Australian that is doing better today than they were in May 2022, when the Prime Minister promised that he had a plan to ease the cost-of-living crisis that Australians were facing—although we did hear from the member for Swan that apparently things have improved in the last six months, which I found staggering; things have got better which have never been better. I assumed that it was just the Prime Minister and the Treasurer that were completely out of touch and that the backbench had to sit quietly and weren't able to tell them, but it appears that the backbench also think that the Australian people have never had it better, the crisis is over and things are going well. In the real world, when you talk to community groups, you hear a different story. The member for Menzies, my good friend, mentioned food banks in his community. Well, I've also been talking to charities and food banks in my community. In the last two weeks, two food banks that I went to visit, completely independently of each other, referenced the working poor that they are now looking after. To quote Discovery Community Care: 'the working poor category has been the biggest growth demographic for us in 2024. We have grown by 400 per cent since March 2024.' Yet those opposite have the audacity to stand here today and tell us that it's all going well: 'We've never had better, it is improving, the cost-of-living crisis has been solved,' as the member for Swan said. It's all part of the spin of this government. The Prime Minister and the Treasurer have been talking about the inflation rate this week, but they don't talk about the true mean inflation, which is the true inflation rate that the RBA governor looks at when they decide as a board what's going to happen with interest rates. The reason they won't talk about the true mean inflation is that it actually went up in October. It went from 3.2 per cent in September to 3.5 per cent in October, pushing back any chance of a rate cut in the near future, because the RBA governor has said she will continue to look past the artificial nature of the energy subsidies of the Treasurer and the Prime Minister. Another thing those opposite don't like to talk about since the election is that promise to reduce energy prices by $275. They made that promise 97 times before the election, and it hasn't been echoed since. Early on in the term, we got some interjections from those opposite: 'Well, we said it would happen by 2025.' Guess what? We're on the doorstep of 2025, and energy bills have not gone down by $275 for the Australian people. The data shows that, when the subsidies come off, they will increase significantly next year. There would have been a 16 per cent increase in energy prices if it wasn't for that rebate. Prices are continuing to go up. This is a government that is focused on the symptoms and the political spin. They have no answers to the genuine challenges of the Australian people or to ease the cost-of-living crisis. They have to address productivity. That is the core issue that we are facing at the moment. Productivity has fallen 6.3 per cent under this government, but those opposite have no plans, policies or actions to address the productivity crisis that we are facing in Australia. The reality is that in May 2022 this Prime Minister promised he had a plan for the Australian people, but 2½ years later that plan has failed. There is not one Australian that is better off today than they were in May 2022. We have an out-of-touch Prime Minister who is weak and is not making the right decisions for the Australian people. For those residents that go to food banks that are feeling the pain and are suffering three weeks before Christmas, there is no end in sight to the pain that they feel, and this government has no answers to the challenges and crisis facing the Australian public. 16:41 Ms MILLER-FROST 296272 Boothby Those opposite seem to have some misplaced nostalgia for the Morrison era. Their 'back on track' mantra offers Australians the spectre of going backwards to the Morrison era. I don't know of any Australians who actually look back fondly on the man who holidayed in Hawaii while Australia burned, but, since they're clear they want to take Australia backwards, let's revisit some of the ghosts of the past. While we could go through the secret ministries, the rorts or the scandals, let's start with economic mismanagement: nine long years of running up debt with deficit after deficit. They were on track to exceed $1 trillion of debt in the next year, and two-thirds of it ran up before the pandemic. Every Australian family knows that, if you spend more than you earn, you build debt, and that's exactly what those opposite did to our country. We inherited inflation at 6.1 per cent and rising. Real wages were going back by 3.4 per cent as a deliberate economic strategy by those opposite. When inflation goes up and your wages are going backwards, that's a direct hit on your standard of living. Productivity growth had suffered its worst decade in 60 years. Twenty-four coal-fired power stations had announced closures, and those opposite had done exactly nothing about it. There was a chronic skills shortage in every sector of the economy, and, instead of addressing this, they just put barriers in front of Australians who wanted to upskill to get jobs. They made it more expensive to upskill. Talk about pulling the ladder up behind you. They really don't like young Australians, and they certainly don't want them to be able to build a career, afford a house, start a family or do whatever they want in their lives. I'm sorry to depress you with that brief sojourn into the dark years when those opposite were wielding their worst on the Australian public to please their wealthy, elite big-business owners, but I think it's important, when they start talking about taking Australia backwards, to remember what that track was. But I don't want to leave you depressed, so what have we been doing? We've turned their nine deficits into back-to-back surpluses. They've been banked, bringing Australia's debt level down and reducing our interest burden. Inflation has more than halved, down from 6.1 per cent to 2.1 per cent, and, yes, underlying inflation is coming down as well. There have now been four consecutive quarters of real wages growth. This government wants Australians to earn more, and it's happening, but we also want them to keep more of what they earn. That's why Labor's tax cuts benefited every single worker in Australia, not just the wealthy ones that those opposite wanted them to benefit. Over a million jobs have been created, the majority full time. The unemployment rate is on track to average below four per cent for the entire parliamentary term for the first time since records began, and, while those opposite let 24 coal-fired stations announce closures and did nothing to fill the energy gap, we've signed off 65 large-scale renewable projects. That is enough to power over four million Australian homes, including energy storage, an important part of ensuring that we have 24/7 power available for all Australians. To address energy costs for Australians we've capped the costs, and we've provided direct, targeted energy bill relief—both measures that those opposite voted against. We've wiped $3 billion of student debt for more than three million Australians. We've introduced prac payments for nursing, midwifery, teaching and social work students, to remove another barrier. We've provided over 500,000 fee-free TAFE places, because, unlike those opposite, who pull the ladder up behind them, we understand that not only is this a great hand up for Australians who want to upskill and have great careers; it's also fundamental for the prosperity of this country that we solve our skilled labour shortage. We've put $32 billion into addressing the housing shortage. Those opposite cared so little about housing for Australians that for much of the last decade they didn't even have a housing minister. In the health sector, we tripled bulk-billing incentives, leading to an average four per cent increase in bulk-billing consults in my state of South Australia. We've provided cheaper medicines by cutting the co-payment, freezing PBS prices and introducing 60-day prescriptions. They voted against it. These are all measures that save Australians money. While those opposite talk openly about taking Australia backwards, we cannot risk the man voted by doctors as the worst health minister ever. He was the worst home affairs minister. This is a reckless, arrogant opposition leader who seems to think he can go to an election with zero costed policies in the public domain. I'm left with a question: does the opposition leader actually not have any plan, or is he just keeping it secret from the Australian voters? Either way, it's too big a risk. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 249710 The discussion has concluded. BILLS 83 BILLS Future Made in Australia (Production Tax Credits and Other Measures) Bill 2024 83

Future Made in Australia (Production Tax Credits and Other Measures) Bill 2024

Second Reading 83 16:46 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fenner I move: That the question be now put. The SPEAKER 53517 The question before the House is that the question be put.    

The House divided. [16:50]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

75 AYES Albanese, A. N. Aly, A. Ananda-Rajah, M. Bandt, A. P. Bates, S. J. Belyea, J. A. Bowen, C. E. Burke, A. S. Burney, L. J. Burns, J. Butler, M. C. Byrnes, A. J. Chalmers, J. E. Chandler-Mather, M. Charlton, A. H. G. Chesters, L. M. Claydon, S. C. Coker, E. A. Collins, J. M. Conroy, P. M. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. Freelander, M. R. Garland, C. M. L. Georganas, S. Giles, A. J. Gorman, P. Gosling, L. J. Hill, J. C. 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. 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'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. Scrymgour, M. R. Shorten, W. R. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Vamvakinou, M. Watson-Brown, E. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. Wilson, J. H. Zappia, A. 58 NOES Andrews, K. L. Archer, B. K. Bell, A. M. Birrell, S. J. Boyce, C. E. Broadbent, R. E. Buchholz, S. 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. 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. 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. Scamps, S. A. Sharkie, R. C. C. Spender, A. M. Steggall, Z. Stevens, J. Sukkar, M. S. Taylor, A. J. Tehan, D. T. Thompson, P. Tink, K. J. van Manen, A. J. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Ware, J. L. Webster, A. E. Wilkie, A. D. Willcox, A. J. Wilson, R. J. Wolahan, K. Young, T. J. 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

 16:53 The SPEAKER 53517 The question now is that the bill be now read a second time.    

The House divided. [16:58]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

86 AYES Albanese, A. N. Aly, A. Ananda-Rajah, M. Bandt, A. P. Bates, S. J. Belyea, J. A. Bowen, C. E. Burke, A. S. Burney, L. J. Burns, J. Butler, M. C. Byrnes, A. J. Chalmers, J. E. Chaney, K. E. Charlton, A. H. G. Chesters, L. M. Claydon, S. C. Coker, E. A. Collins, J. M. Conroy, P. M. Daniel, Z. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. Freelander, M. R. Garland, C. M. L. Gee, A. R. Georganas, S. Giles, A. J. Gorman, P. Gosling, L. J. Haines, H. M. 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. 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'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. Ryan, M. M. Scamps, S. A. Scrymgour, M. R. Sharkie, R. C. C. Shorten, W. R. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Spender, A. M. Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Steggall, Z. Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Tink, K. J. Vamvakinou, M. Watson-Brown, E. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. Wilkie, A. D. Wilson, J. H. Zappia, A. 50 NOES Andrews, K. L. Archer, B. K. Bell, A. M. Birrell, S. J. Boyce, C. E. Broadbent, R. E. Buchholz, S. Caldwell, C. M. Chester, D. J. Coleman, D. B. Conaghan, P. J. Coulton, M. M. (Teller) Dutton, P. C. Entsch, W. G. Fletcher, P. W. Gillespie, D. A. Goodenough, I. R. 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. Littleproud, D. Marino, N. B. McCormack, M. F. McIntosh, M. I. O'Brien, E. L. O'Brien, L. S. Pearce, G. B. Pike, H. J. Pitt, K. J. Price, M. L. Ramsey, R. E. (Teller) Stevens, J. Sukkar, M. S. Taylor, A. J. Tehan, D. T. Thompson, P. van Manen, A. J. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Ware, J. L. Webster, A. E. Willcox, A. J. Wilson, R. J. Wolahan, K. Young, T. J. 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.
Bill read a second time.
Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced.

 Third Reading 85 17:00 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fenner by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS 85 MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS Annual Climate Change Statement 85 Reference to Federation Chamber 95 17:54 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon by leave—I move: That the order of the day be referred to the Federation Chamber for debate. Question agreed to. BILLS 95 BILLS Transport Security Amendment (Security of Australia's Transport Sector) Bill 2024 95

Transport Security Amendment (Security of Australia's Transport Sector) Bill 2024

First Reading 95 Second Reading 95 17:55 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Our aviation and maritime sectors are integral to Australia as an island nation, and they connect us to the world. It is more important than ever that we work closely with these sectors to ensure our nation's security and resilience. We share the responsibility to safeguard the transport industry, and with it the travelling public, from current and emerging threats. The Transport Security Amendment (Security of Australia's Transport Sector) Bill 2024 is an essential part of this responsibility. The transport sector is critical for sustaining Australia's social and economic prosperity, national security and defence, and for facilitating the provision of essential goods and services. A secure and resilient transport sector is one where supply chains and essential services are maintained, bolstering trade networks and economic growth. Australia faces an inherently complex geostrategic environment. Threats to Australia's critical infrastructure continue to be significant and far-reaching. The transport security legislative frameworks were enacted when terrorism was the greatest threat to the transport sector. But while the threat of terrorism remains, we now must protect against nation-states and other actors targeting our critical transport infrastructure through espionage, sabotage, and foreign interference: all significant and evolving threats. Malicious cyberactivity also remains a threat: according to the Australian Signal Directorate's recently released Annual cyber threat report 2023-2024, there is still a cyber incident in Australia reported every six minutes. Catastrophic natural hazards and the COVID-19 pandemic have also exposed vulnerabilities and cascading consequences for Australia's critical transport infrastructure and supply chain resilience. The consequences for lapses in transport security are severe, and while felt by the transport industry and the travelling public, it is us as the government who are held accountable by the Australian people. This bill will strengthen government's and industry's resilience to current and emerging threats, and will provide the chance for government and industry to strengthen its capabilities and partnerships. This bill reaffirms the government's commitment to Australia maintaining world-leading transport security settings. In September 2021, the former government commissioned an Independent Review into Australia's Aviation and Maritime Transport Security Settings, led by Ms Kerri Hartland. This review holistically considered Australia's aviation and maritime security settings, beginning with a high-level threat assessment, followed by a detailed assessment of security vulnerabilities. The review made recommendations which sought to ensure Australia's security settings remained fit for purpose and robust, and appropriately supported Australia's economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. Given the findings of the independent review, the increasing complex and evolving threat environment and industry feedback, my department is progressing a multifaceted reform agenda to deliver targeted, high-impact legislative and regulatory initiatives to the transport security legislative frameworks, as well as strengthening government and industry capability and partnerships. This bill will amend the Aviation Transport Security Act 2004 and the Maritime Transport and Offshore Facilities Security Act 2003 to: enhance government and industry's resilience to current and emerging threats enable government to effectively respond to intelligence provide for proportionate regulation under robust and fit-for-purpose compliance and enforcement powers and align the security obligations of the transport sector with other critical infrastructure sectors in Australia. The bill introduces a number of key security objectives. It amends the definition of 'unlawful interference' to capture current and emerging threats that are not bound by physical or geographical location, including cybersecurity incidents. Mandatory cybersecurity incident reporting is being introduced. This requirement will align the transport sector with other critical infrastructure sectors and ensure that Australia is meetings its international security obligations. It introduces an all hazards security framework that will require entities to proactively identify and mitigate risks to physical security, personnel security, cybersecurity, supply chain resilience and natural hazards. This reflects the shift away from a counterterrorism focus towards a more proactive, holistic approach to current and emerging threats. It amends the definition of 'test weapon' and introduces a regulation-making power to define items as test weapons. It extends the system testing to the maritime sector to support industry capability and responsiveness to security threats and ensure consistent compliance and enforcement tools are available across the transport sector. It will introduce vulnerability testing in the aviation and maritime sectors to allow the department to assess what security improvements need to be made to people, processes technology and legislation. Vulnerability testing will assist the department to test the limits of a system's capability to improve Australia's aviation and maritime security settings and to partner with industry to identify potential vulnerabilities. It will broaden and align the secretary's power across the legislative frameworks to issue a security direction where a specific or general threat of unlawful interference is made or exists or there's a change in the nature or risk of an existing threat of unlawful interference. It extends the demerit points system to the air cargo sector to align scalable and proportionate enforcement options across the aviation sector to address serious and ongoing patterns of noncompliance. It amends the definitions of 'port', 'security regulated port' and 'port facility' in the Maritime Transport and Offshore Facilities Security Act to clarify the scope of facilities, functions and capabilities that are contemplated in the definitions. This will ensure the relevant entities who contribute to the overall functioning of the port can be captured and provide the maritime industry with the tools to facilitate an all-hazards approach to strengthening the security and resilience of the Australian maritime sector. It introduce amendments to streamline processes, modernise language and achieve proportionate regulation for a small cohort of dual-purpose vessels. The continued focus on proportionate regulation acknowledges our shared responsibility for security with industry and ensures both proactive and reactive measures are in place for ongoing protection against current and emerging threats. Naturally, there will be costs incurred while industry raises its capability and becomes compliant with these reforms. However, the prevention of security incidents and their cascading consequences is a benefit that we can't understate. Recognising the importance of these reforms and the shared responsibility with industry for Australia's transport security, the government consulted widely throughout the course of 2023 and 2024 to ensure the proposed measures were appropriately designed and targeted. This consultation included the establishment of a cross-sectoral industry advisory committee, multiple discussion papers, an impact analysis and extensive face-to-face consultation. This comprehensive consultation process provided the transport sector with an appropriate opportunity to ask questions and provide invaluable feedback, which helped shape the bill. Industry has generally been supportive of these measures. The Department of Home Affairs will continue to work closely with industry during the implementation of these legislative reforms, through the development of the regulations and as we progress future stages of the reform agenda. Future stages will include subsequent legislative and regulatory amendments, as well as initiatives to improve government and industry capability and partnerships. The department regularly monitors and evaluates security processes, policies and programs, striving for transparency, accountability and continuous improvement. Recent incidents have highlighted the existing vulnerabilities within the transport sector to a variety of hazards, including things such as cybersecurity risks, supply chain disruptions and natural hazards. This bill and the stronger security measures it contains will significantly contribute to addressing these threats and ensure the continued reliability, continuity and security of Australia's transport and critical infrastructure and I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Customs Amendment (Expedited Seizure and Disposal of Engineered Stone) Bill 2024 97

Customs Amendment (Expedited Seizure and Disposal of Engineered Stone) Bill 2024

First Reading 97 Second Reading 97 18:06 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Albanese Labor government believes that every Australian should have the right to go to work and return home safely and, in doing so, be protected from the development of life-threatening diseases. Our government is committed to protecting Australian workers from the harm associated with silicosis and silica related diseases. These are insidious diseases that infect the lungs of humans over a long period of time and often result in an agonising death. To support this aim, in cooperation with the states and territories, we have implemented a world-first prohibition on the use, manufacture, supply, processing and installation of engineered stone benchtops, panels and slabs that cause these diseases. This initiative will be further strengthened by the prohibition on the illegal importation of engineered stone that is intended to be implemented on 1 January 2025. The Customs Amendment (Expedited Seizure and Disposal of Engineered Stone) Bill 2024 is a key component required to support the proposed import prohibition. The amendments in this bill will support the Australian Border Force's operational effectiveness by enabling Australian Border Force officers to more efficiently administer and dispose of seized engineered stone at the border. The Customs Act 1901currently generally requires seized prohibited imports to be stored for a minimum of 30 days before destruction. However, engineered stone products are a bulk good, and the management of seized engineered stone products at the border poses significant challenges in terms of storage, transport, disposal and administration. The amendments in this bill will provide a mechanism for the Australian government to deal with seized engineered stone in an efficient manner, by allowing the immediate destruction of the prohibited goods following seizure. Similar provisions already exist for other prohibited imports, including tobacco products, vapes, dangerous and perishable goods, and illicit drugs. This bill amends section 206 of the Customs Act to empower the Comptroller-General of Customs to deal with seized engineered stone in a manner that he or she considers appropriate, including the immediate destruction of the goods. It is expected that immediate destruction may be used in situations where engineered stone is imported without a permit, or in contravention of permit conditions. Importers will retain the right to make a claim to recover market value of the goods through judicial review. This bill will ensure that the intended new import prohibition for engineered stone can be implemented, while not impacting the Australian government's ability to effectively manage other priorities at the border. I commend this bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Incentives and Integrity) Bill 2024 98

Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Incentives and Integrity) Bill 2024

First Reading 98 Second Reading 98 18:10 Mr JONES A9B Whitlam I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The bill reflects the government's commitment to ensuring fairness and integrity in our tax system while fostering a cleaner, more sustainable future. It addresses two key areas: incentivising the transition to electric vehicles with targeted tax concessions and strengthening the integrity of our tax system to ensure it does not reward those who are doing the wrong thing. Schedule 1 of this bill updates the definition of a fuel-efficient vehicle under the luxury car tax. From 1 July 2025, vehicles will need to be genuinely fuel efficient and produce low emissions to access the higher concessional threshold. That is, they must not use more than 3.5 litres of fuel per 100 kilometres to qualify. This is down from the current rate of seven litres per 100 kilometres. This change ensures that only the most fuel-efficient and low-emission vehicles—like electric and plug-in hybrids—can access this benefit. It delivers on our commitment to support the uptake of EVs and to help Australians drive cars that are cleaner, cheaper to run and aligned with a more sustainable future. We also adjust how the LCT thresholds are updated for inflation, preventing the gap between standard and fuel-efficient thresholds from shrinking over time. These changes align with the government's National Electric Vehicle Strategy and our broader goal to reduce emissions in the transport sector. Schedule 2 amends the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 to remove income tax deductions for amounts of general interest charge (GIC) and shortfall interest charge (SIC) incurred on or after 1 July 2025. These penalties apply when tax payments are late or incorrectly self-assessed. Removing their deductibility ensures they remain an effective deterrent, encouraging businesses and individuals to meet their obligations on time. At the same time, we do recognise that life can be unpredictable. The Commissioner of Taxation will retain his current discretion to remit or partially remit GIC and SIC—that is, the general interest charge and the shortfall interest charge—in appropriate cases—for example, when taxpayers are affected by natural disasters, sudden illness or a financial hardship. The ATO remains committed to working with businesses and individuals who are struggling to meet their tax obligations, offering tailored solutions and support. However, it is vital that businesses engage early rather than ignore their responsibilities. This measure is about leveling the playing field. It ensures that taxpayers who do the right thing are not disadvantaged while we continue to uphold the integrity of the tax system. I turn to schedule 3, which extends the time the Commissioner of Taxation has to notify taxpayers about retaining a BAS statement—that is, a business activity statement—refund from 14 to 30 days. This extension addresses challenges encountered during periods of increased fraudulent activity, such as those identified during the recent Operation Protego. With Operation Protego, criminal groups lodged thousands and thousands of fake BASs claiming refunds for non-existent expenses. These fraudulent claims had to be processed before proper scrutiny could be applied, costing taxpayers millions of dollars. We're changing the law to reduce the chance that this thing happens again. Extending the notification period gives the ATO the time needed to properly investigate high-risk claims, ensuring fraudulent activity doesn't undermine the system. I want to assure members of the House that for the vast majority of businesses, this change will have no impact. In 2022-23, 90 per cent of refunds were processed within 14 days. This will continue. Where refunds are held longer for review, the ATO will pay interest if there wasn't any fraud, ensuring compliant businesses are not disadvantaged. This measure strengthens protections for honest taxpayers and maintains public confidence in the integrity of our tax system. I commend the bill to the House. Full details of the measure are contained in the explanatory memorandum. Debate adjourned. Health Legislation Amendment (Improved Medicare Integrity and Other Measures) Bill 2024 99

Health Legislation Amendment (Improved Medicare Integrity and Other Measures) Bill 2024

First Reading 99 Second Reading 99 18:15 Ms KEARNEY LTU Cooper I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Today, I introduce the Health Legislation Amendment (Improved Medicare Integrity and Other Measures) Bill 2024. Australia has a world-class health system that offers affordable, high-quality, accessible health care to all Australians. This is due in large part to the various health benefit schemes—including Medicare and its programs—that help Australians pay for the health care they need. The government is committed to protecting and strengthening Medicare—and part of this is improving the compliance framework that ensures the integrity of these rebates. The Independent Review of Medicare Integrity and Compliance undertaken by Dr Pradeep Philip, known as the Philip review, was commissioned by the government to respond to concerns about the operation of the Medicare system. In 2023, the Health Insurance Amendment (Professional Services Review Scheme) Act 2023 and the Health Insurance Amendment (Professional Services Review Scheme No. 2) Act 2023 made priority amendments in response to this review. Now that these urgent amendments have been made, this bill implements additional proposals to respond to Philip review recommendations including reducing the timeframe for making bulk-billed claims to support the integrity and ongoing sustainability of Medicare. The bill implements a measure announced in the 2024-25 budget: reducing the timeframe during which Medicare claims for bulk-billed services can be made from two years to one year. Claims relating to bulk-billed services can currently be made up to two years after a health service has been provided. The bill will improve payment integrity and reduce the number of incorrect and fraudulently submitted claims. This is likely to have minimal impact on patients and practitioners as most claims are already made within 12 months. There will be discretion to accept claims after that time to ensure patients are not disadvantaged. Investigative powers Currently, a range of legislative provisions across health portfolio legislation are creating barriers to effective compliance activities, particularly when it comes to deterring and responding to serious non-compliance and fraud. The bill responds to these barriers by allowing investigative powers to be used consistently and effectively across Medicare and the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. Changes will also enable powers to be used in the investigation of Criminal Code offences and remove the need for AFP assistance with executing warrants for suspected Criminal Code offences. These amendments will improve investigative powers in health portfolio legislation and ensure they can be put into practice consistently, effectively and proportionately to respond to behaviour that jeopardises the integrity of health benefits schemes. Pharmacy approval process Under the National Health Act 1953, a pharmacist can request that the Minister for Health and Aged Care exercise a discretion to approve the supply of pharmaceutical benefits at particular premises. This is currently a two-stage process, which can take up to six months. This is frustrating and time-consuming for the applicant and may also delay the community's access to pharmaceutical benefits. In this bill, the two-stage process is proposed to be streamlined and condensed into a single-stage process of up to four months. This will help to reduce a significant administrative burden. And it will provide the community with more timely access to pharmaceutical benefits in appropriate cases. The bill makes several sensible amendments to the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989(the Therapeutic Goods Act) to: enhance the Department of Health and Aged Care's capacity to manage and alleviate the consequences of therapeutic goods shortages; and support compliance and enforcement activities undertaken in relation to unlawful therapeutic goods and unlawful vaping goods. The bill enhances the capacity of the government to manage and alleviate the consequences of therapeutic goods shortages in Australia. This measure expands an existing mechanism in the Therapeutic Goods Act to help deal with critical shortages of medicines, biologicals and medical devices that are approved for supply in Australia, by allowing the secretary of the department to approve the importation or supply of substitutable unapproved products from overseas if the Secretary is satisfied that the approved medicine, biological or medical device may, in the reasonably foreseeable future, become unavailable or be in short supply. Before exercising this power, the secretary would consider the suitability of granting such an approval, including whether it is in the interest of public health. This is necessary because the Therapeutic Goods Act currently only allows the Secretary to exercise this power when satisfied that approved medicines, biologicals or medical devices are already unavailable or in short supply. The limitation hinders Australia's present capacity to act nimbly in this area. The bill supports compliance and enforcement activities in relation to both unlawful therapeutic goods and unlawful vaping goods. Specifically, the bill broadens the circumstances in which section 52AAA applies to ensure that forfeiture arrangements can extend to the range of circumstances in which goods may be seized under the Therapeutic Goods Act. Rather than, as currently, only the circumstance where goods are seized under a warrant issued under section 50. This amendment will help deter the trafficking of such goods by sending a strong message to bad actors operating in this space that the Therapeutic Goods Administration (the TGA) will take unlawful goods permanently. The bill also ensures the relevant parts of the Act are better aligned with the model provisions of the Regulatory Powers (Standard Provisions) Act 2014 in relation to the powers and functions of persons assisting an authorised person executing a warrant and provides investigators greater flexibility when temporarily ceasing the execution of a warrant. The bill lowers the threshold that must be satisfied before the secretary may give an enforceable direction to a person under section 42YT of the Therapeutic Goods Act. The current requirement is that a direction is necessary to protect the health and safety of humans. The amendment will result in a more balanced approach that a direction must be considered and issued in the interests of public health and safety. This approach ensures the more appropriate availability of such directions to protect Australians from new and emerging public health threats. The bill enhances the ability of state and territory officers to monitor, investigate and enforce compliance with the Therapeutic Goods Act and Regulations by allowing for the provision, inspection, copying and retention of documents or information. The bill also clarifies that section 61, which authorises the release of information in relation to therapeutic goods and vaping goods in certain circumstances, is not a secrecy provision. Other amendments to the Therapeutic Goods Act The bill includes other amendments to the Therapeutic Goods Act, principally to: reflect that the secretary's power to declare that a good meets, or does not meet, the definition of a 'therapeutic good' under the act is legislative, rather than administrative, in nature; update the power in section 63 to align requirements under the Therapeutic Goods Act and the Legislation Act 2003 in relation to the incorporation of documents by reference; introduce new offences and civil penalties for breaching a condition of an exemption, or certain approvals to access biologicals that are not included in the Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods (the Register), to align with equivalent provisions in the Therapeutic Goods Act for medicines and medical devices; ensure consistency of the secretary's power to cancel the registration or listing of medicines from the register that are also covered by an exemption, with other cancellation powers in the Therapeutic Goods Act; remove the secretary's obligation to publish the names of authorised persons under the Therapeutic Goods Act and its regulations, to reflect important privacy and safety concerns for affected persons; enable regulations to be made to prescribe circumstances in which the secretary must not grant an authority to a medical practitioner under the Authorised Prescriber pathway for accessing therapeutic goods that are not included in the register, to protect patients from products that are unsafe or unlikely to be effective; and clarify that, if the regulations prescribe a fee in connection with the relevant secretary's power to grant consents, payment of that fee is a pre-condition to the exercise of the secretary's power to give the consent. Supporting the g overnment's vaping reforms The bill also amends the Therapeutic Goods Act to make minor consequential amendments to support the government's ground-breaking vaping reforms. The bill makes minor refinements to: enhance investigations and enforcement action undertaken by state and territory health departments, and state or territory police officers, following the positive adoption of the vaping reforms by the states and territories this year; provide clarity around the interaction between the vaping reforms and existing parts of the act which do not relate to vaping goods; and enable the making of regulations to prohibit dealings in vaping goods that are the subject of an international agreement to which Australia is a party. This reflects the possibility that Australia may, in the future, wish to ratify an international agreement that requires the Commonwealth to prohibit or restrict the importation, exportation, manufacture or supply of vaping goods. The amendments will provide for the making of regulations that implement and give effect to such obligations, if desirable, as efforts to regulate vaping goods intensify globally. The bill also clarifies that the authority for making determinations to cease supply of vaping goods resides in the regulations, rather than the act. This enables the secretary to make a single decision in relation to a vaping good which is rightly the subject of merits review. In addition, the bill makes minor amendments to: clarify that the regulation of advertising and dissemination of generic information about vaping goods that are therapeutic goods is exclusively housed in part 5-1A of the Therapeutic Goods Act; and enable the secretary to more readily issue a direction under part 5-1A about the dissemination of generic information about vaping goods, which is critical in circumstances where that information is misleading and could lead to patient harm. Consistent with this government's unwavering commitment to public health, these measures support strong and effective regulation under the Therapeutic Goods Act. Finally, the bill amends the Public Health (Tobacco and Other Products) Act 2023(the tobacco act) which commenced on 1 April 2024. These amendments clarify the intended operation of the provisions and are amendments that have been identified as necessary in the implementation phase of the legislation. The amendments remove the restriction on which Australian Public Service employees can be 'authorised officers' for the purpose of tobacco enforcement and compliance. This will mean that the compliance team for the tobacco act can be drawn from any portfolio within the APS, consistent with past practice. In the past National Measurement Institute officers from the Department of Industry, Science and Resources have performed this important role. The amendments provide for phase-in and phase-out provisions to be included in regulations when details included in the regulations are updated in future. The intention is that health warnings, health promotion inserts and images displayed on tobacco products and packaging are refreshed. This is directed to maximising their effectiveness to deter uptake and encourage cessation of smoking. Phase-in and phase-out provisions will ensure that regulations provide for time periods for industry preparation and for retailers to sell through stock. The amendments also clarify the interaction between the Therapeutic Goods Act and the tobacco act advertising provisions relating to e-cigarettes (also known as vapes). Both acts prohibit the advertisement of vapes. These amendments reflect the changed approach to vaping goods following the introduction of the vaping reforms to ensure the approach is harmonised. The measures in this bill will further the government's efforts to strengthen Medicare and will assist in the implementation of our world-leading tobacco and vaping reforms. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. COMMITTEES 102 COMMITTEES Public Works Joint Committee 102 Approval of Work 102 18:29 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: Commonwealth Science and Industrial Research Organisation—Australian Centre for Disease Preparedness—Electrical infrastructure replacement, Geelong, Victoria. The Commonwealth Science and Industrial Research Organisation is proposing works to replace critical electrical infrastructure at its Australian Centre for Disease Preparedness, located in Geelong, Victoria. The estimated cost of the works is $29.9 million, excluding GST. The proposed works were referred to the public works committee on 20 August 2024. Following its inquiry, the committee recommended that the House of Representatives resolve that it is expedient to carry out the proposed works. Subject to parliamentary approval, construction is expected to commence in June 2025 and be completed by January 2027. On behalf of the government, I would like to thank the committee, ably chaired by the member for Moreton, for undertaking a timely inquiry. I commend the motion to the House. Question agreed to. Approval of Work 102 18:31 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—Army Aviation Omnibus Program of Works. The Department of Defence is proposing to deliver new and upgraded facilities and infrastructure at RAAF Base Townsville and the Townsville Field Training Area, Queensland, to support the introduction into service of the new Apache helicopter capability. The estimated cost of the works is $518.3 million, excluding GST. The proposed works were referred to the public works committee on 20 August 2024. Following its inquiry, the committee recommended that the House of Representatives resolve that it is expedient to carry out the proposed works. Subject to parliamentary approval, construction is expected to commence in early 2025 and be completed by late 2028. On behalf of the government, I would like to thank the committee, ably chaired by the member for Moreton, for undertaking a timely inquiry. I commend the motion to the House. Question agreed to. Approval of Work 103 18:32 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—Facilities to Support Improved Embarked Logistics Support Helicopter. The Department of Defence is proposing to deliver facilities and infrastructure at HMAS Albatross, near Nowra in New South Wales, and HMAS Stirling, south of Perth, Western Australia, to support the introduction, operations and sustainment of additional new Seahawk Romeo helicopters for the Royal Australian Navy. The estimated cost of the works is $146.0 million, excluding GST. The proposed works were referred to the public works committee on 20 August 2024. Following its inquiry, the committee recommended that the House of Representatives resolve that it is expedient to carry out the proposed works. Subject to parliamentary approval, construction is expected to commence in mid-2025, for completion in mid-2027. On behalf of the government, I would like to thank the committee, ably chaired by the member for Moreton, for undertaking a timely inquiry. I commend the motion to the House. Question agreed to. Approval of Work 103 18:34 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 Foreign Affairs and Trade—Australian High Commission project, Honiara, Solomon Islands. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade is proposing works to construct a new chancery and supporting facilities on a newly-acquired site in Honiara, Solomon Islands. The estimated cost of the project is $135.3 million excluding GST. The proposed work was referred to the Public Works Committee on 9 October 2024. Following its inquiry, the committee recommended that the House of Representatives resolve that it is expedient to carry out the proposed works. Subject to parliamentary approval, construction is expected to commence in mid-2025, for completion in 2029. On behalf of the government, I would like to thank the committee for undertaking a timely inquiry. I commend the motion to the House. Question agreed to. Approval of Work 103 18:35 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 Foreign Affairs and Trade—Proposed fit-out of new leased premises at 19 National Circuit, Barton, ACT. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade is proposing works to fit-out a new office building at 19 National Circuit, Barton, ACT, which will be leased for a period of 15 years from late 2026. The estimated cost of the project is $85.45 million excluding GST. The proposed works were referred to the Public Works Committee on 17 September 2024. Following its inquiry, the committee recommended that the House of Representatives resolve that it is expedient to carry out the proposed works. Subject to parliamentary approval, construction is expected to commence in October 2025 and be completed by September 2026. On behalf of the government, I would like to thank the committee, ably chaired by the member for Moreton, for undertaking a time inquiry. I commend the motion to the House. Question agreed to. Approval of Work 104 18:37 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 Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts—Command Centre and Canine Facility at Western Sydney International (Nancy-Bird Walton) Airport. The Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts is proposing the construction of a command centre and a dedicated canine facility at the Western Sydney International (Nancy Bird Walton) Airport for use by essential Commonwealth agencies. The estimated cost of the command centre and canine facility will not exceed $218.67 million excluding GST and $46.35 million excluding GST respectively. The proposed works were referred to the Public Works Committee on 11 September 2024. Following its inquiry, the committee recommended that the House of Representatives resolve that it is expedient to carry out the proposed works. Subject to parliamentary approval, construction is scheduled to commence by quarter 1 of 2025 with completion scheduled for quarter 2 of 2026 for the canine facility and quarter 1 of 2027 for the command centre. On behalf of the government, I would like to thank the committee, ably chaired by the member for Moreton and ably deputy chaired by the member for Hinkler, for undertaking a timely inquiry. I commend the motion to the House. Question agreed to. STATEMENTS 104 STATEMENTS Personal Explanation 104 18:38 Mr HUSIC 91219 Chifley Mr Speaker, I wish to make a personal explanation. The SPEAKER 53517 Do you claim to have been misrepresented? Mr HUSIC 91219 I do. The SPEAKER 53517 You may proceed. Mr HUSIC 91219 Yesterday, during debate on the Future Made in Australia (Guarantee of Origin) Bill, the member for Herbert made the following claim in relation to the government's investment in PsiQuantum, saying: … Minister Husic decided to invest in this business independently of any departmental appraisal, analysis or recommendation. This is false. It's a matter of public record that the decision was not made by me; it was made via cabinet processes. It is also a matter of public record that the investment was subject to robust legal, technical, commercial probity advice and supported by departmental recommendations. I direct the member to evidence of this in Senate order for the production of documents No. 606, Freedom of information responses published on the Department of Industry, Science and Resources website, Hansard transcripts and responses to questions on notice from Senate estimates hearings this year. I also direct the House's attention to the former coalition government's decision to invest $2 billion in American multinational Moderna, excluding local firms in the deal, negotiated by a donor of the Liberal Party. COMMITTEES 104 COMMITTEES Petitions Committee 104 Report 104 18:40 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie I present report No. 36 of the Standing Committee on Petitions. The report read as follows— The report was unavailable at time o f publishing. PETITIONS 104 PETITIONS Responses 104 18:40 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie by leave—I present seven ministerial responses to petitions. The responses were unavailable at time of publishing. COMMITTEES 105 COMMITTEES Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Joint Committee 105 Report 105 18:40 Mr BURNS 278522 Macnamara () (): On behalf of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade, I present the committee's report entitled Pursuing the priorities of the Pacific: Inquiry into Australia's alignment with the priorities of Pacific island countries. Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e). Mr BURNS 278522 by leave—The Pacific is Australia's family, and the Pacific interests are central to Australia's national interests. We must align ourselves with the needs and aspirations of the people of our region. Competition has never been fiercer and yet the opportunity also so big. One thing we heard over and over again as part of this inquiry is the existential threat facing people in the Pacific today, and that is climate change. We must work alongside our Pacific partners to lead the global efforts to tackle climate change, reduce emissions and support communities who are facing these daily impacts. That is why one of the recommendations, which I'll begin my remarks with, is that the Foreign Affairs and Aid Subcommittee has recommended that Australian government publicly commits to ensure that no overseas development assistance will be spent on fossil fuel projects in the Pacific by 2026-27. On behalf of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade and the Foreign Affairs and Aid Subcommittee, I'm proud of this report, and I thank the secretariat and all those who make contributions to make this report possible. This report makes 15 recommendations to better align Australia's engagement in the Pacific with the region's own priorities. That was essential to our efforts. We wanted to hear from those in the region and understand what they want. These recommendations range from long-term growth and refinement of our international aid program and strengthening our climate finance and action on deep-sea mining and the conduct of Australian companies overseas, as well as improving mobility pathways for Pacific Island communities. During the course of this inquiry, we clearly heard the region's compelling and longstanding calls for greater action to address the region's immediate and existential threat from human-induced climate change, an issue that, tragically, that many Pacific countries grapple with daily as they face the threat of rising sea levels, increased disease prevalence, collapsing fishing stocks, lost livelihoods and the growing threat of natural disasters. The other thing that was pointed out as part of this inquiry is that those in our region and those in our Pacific family are facing threats of climate change, yet they are not the ones who are contributing to it. Australia is working to support these communities and the wider region, but we can and must do more. In addition to calls for climate action, it was apparent that Australia can play a greater role in supporting the region to tackle its health challenges, with an emphasis on non-communicable diseases. It was also clear that efforts are needed to support the Pacific's growing population of young people, whilst more support is required to address inclusion and promote women's rights throughout the region, as well as other programs. Also of paramount importance is the need for Australia to foster locally-led development by adapting the ways in which our international development funds are channelled. The committee was impressed by Australia's expansive whole-of-government engagement throughout the Pacific, which ranges from defence and security co-operation, policing and immigration, sport, human rights, law reform and many other sectors, but similarly vital to our Pacific engagement are our church networks, business connections, civil society partnerships and academic networks that offer enormous benefits to both Australia and our Pacific partners. Time and time again evidence received throughout the inquiry reaffirmed the strong and enduring relationship between Australia and our Pacific neighbours in which our shared history and our interlinked future were widely acknowledged. I hope this report plays a small role in contributing to a shared future and further strengthens the vibrant and indispensable partnerships between Australia and Pacific Island nations. On behalf of the committee I want to thank the deputy chair, Senator Chandler, in the other place and all members who participated in this inquiry. I want to thank the many stakeholders and submitters who contributed their expertise and time to this inquiry. I also want to thank all members of our subcommittee for their collegiate approach. This was a unanimous report and I'm proud we were able to get agreement across the chamber. To the secretariat, especially Ash, who was the driving force and who was meticulous and organised and made the chair look meticulous and organised, I thank you and your team for all of your work. Ash did an outstanding job and helped compile, I think, a really strong report. On that note, we have a big future to share with our Pacific Islanders countries. It was wonderful to participate and hear from so many friends in the region, and I commend this report to the House. DOCUMENTS 106 DOCUMENTS Australian Signals Directorate, Department Of Home Affairs 106 Presentation 106 18:45 Mr JOSH WILSON 265970 Fremantle I present the Commonwealth Cyber Security Posture in 2024—Report, November 2024 and the Protective security policy framework assessment—Report for 2023-24. BUSINESS 106 BUSINESS Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders 106 18:46 Mr JOSH WILSON 265970 Fremantle I move: That so much of the standing session orders be suspended as to prevent no more than three members immediately giving statements of no longer than five minutes each. It would suit the convenience of the House if at the end of those statements the Speaker suspended the House until the ringing of the bells, which the government expects to be at 7am tomorrow. Question agreed to. Raise Our Voice in Parliament 106 18:46 Ms TINK 300124 North Sydney The Raise our Voice campaign is always a highlight, as young people across our community put pen to paper to give voice to ambitions for our nation. Each time I have taken part in the initiative I have been struck not only by how eloquent our youth are but by how much we can all learn when we choose to listen to them, not to respond but to truly understand. They are, after all, our future. I was so impressed by the submissions we received this year from young North Sydneysiders that I actually have five young voices I want to share with you today. These voices succinctly summarised the key themes offered by many as they answered the question of what they wanted our community to look like in the next 10 years, and the role of parliament in realising those wishes. For many it was bolder action on climate and a greater commitment to environmental protection that topped the list. At just 11 years old, Michiko said: My vision for the next 10 years is of a city that sets an example for the world. I would like to see all properties in North Sydney powered by renewable energy and have a clear plan to achieve this, with no approvals of new property developments without renewable energy. I would also like to see only vehicles powered by green energy. Parking fees, tolls and maintenance fees for vehicles that run on fossil fuels should be multiple times higher than that for renewable energy cars. Malek agreed and said: I want to see greater awareness of climate change and pollution. I am proud of my area but our natural environment is deteriorating. Many high rises are being built, and this causes lots of dust and traffic, which leads to poor air quality, destroying the beautiful nature of our area for which it is renowned. I don't want to live in a dying environment. I want us to be a country and humans to thrive. I believe parliament can achieve this by putting more consideration into plans for urbanisation and the future. The environment must be maintained and protected because it is priceless. Right now, it seems youth care more about the environment than anyone else. This needs to change. Ivy is worried major infrastructure projects like the Warringah Freeway upgrade, which have destroyed public green spaces to the detriment of our community. She said: Public spaces are the centre of life in a community and people are the heart of public spaces. They are meaningful places with layers of shared experiences, collective memories and a mixture of identities. When people feel attached to public spaces, they have a more powerful sense of belonging. The next parliament can help by providing funding and protection for more community spaces. Threats to social cohesion and racism also featured in the submissions, with Naomi saying she would like leaders to stop demonising others and, instead, recognise others can be a source of strength in society. She said: Diversity increases creativity and innovation and promotes higher quality decisions. Naomi would also like the school system to play a greater role in combating systemic racism. She said: … one-third of students have reported direct experiences of racism at school at least once a month. If it's true that we create our biases from an early age, why are we not already kickstarting programs at school that educate youth on racial biases and how to change them? I'll finish with Neela, who having recently heard a refugee speak about his journey to Australia and his time in a detention centre said: … not everyone has an easy journey when living in a country that's not their own. I'm … saddened by his experience and wanted to think about ways our community could assist and make changes … so stories like his are not repeated. Politicians should send a strong message about respect and equality towards people who are culturally different. Local communities should also offer gatherings and educational programs … to ensure smoother integration for those that come … Connecting new families with existing … families could … help them … feel like they belong. My wish would be for our community … to have a different mindset and be inclusive. Learning about each other and embracing our differences will make us stronger. And we should— always— treat people with the … dignity and humanity— they— deserve. With words and ideas like that coming from the mouths of the young people across my community of North Sydney, I feel very confident that we're in very safe hands. I look forward to a time when I see one of those names appear on one of these desks in this place as a representative for a part of my community. PsiQuantum 107 18:51 Mr FLETCHER L6B Bradfield The Albanese Labor government's decision to invest almost $1 billion of taxpayers' money into the American company PsiQuantum raises several serious questions which warrant scrutiny. The opposition has sought to hold up to appropriate scrutiny this extraordinary bet with public money. The government has trenchantly resisted that scrutiny. What we see is a very large amount of public money being bet on one particular company pursuing one particular technology path within the broad field of quantum. People who have worked in the field for 20 or 30 years cannot say with certainty which of the many paths being explored is likely to achieve a successful outcome. A very poor process was followed to get to this decision. The Albanese government agreed to assess an unsolicited proposal from PsiQuantum as early as November 2022, two months before external probity advisers were engaged. The Department of Industry, Science and Resources entered into a non-binding agreement with PsiQuantum in June 2023. Yet the government tells us that all was above board because there was an expression-of-interest process available to a wide range of companies, even though that only commenced in August 2023. Companies were invited, by one email only, to participate. There were no follow-up phone calls; there was no second email. Those who were invited to participate were told they could not speak with Australian government officials. This was after PsiQuantum had been speaking for more than eight months with Australian government officials, up to and including the minister, and the minister had met with them at least twice and had visited their premises in California. We now know the terms of the expression of interest essentially asked respondents to match the promise made by PsiQuantum to build a fault-tolerant error corrected quantum computer by 2030. Many in the sector are very sceptical that this can be done. In this regard, a very interesting article has just come out in Nature, the world's leading multidisciplinary science journal. The journalist, Elizabeth Gibney, has this to say: Yet compared with its competitors, PsiQuantum has shown very little. Rather than building up gradually, as others have done, by debuting systems of tens or hundreds of quantum bits, PsiQuantum is aiming to jump to a machine that will require something in the order of one million qubits … To do that, it will need to overcome technical challenges it has not proved it can solve, says Chao-Yang Lu, a physicist working on photonic quantum computing at the University of Science and Technology of China in Shanghai. He is one of several scientists who worry the firm is promising things it will struggle to deliver. "My impression is there's a lot of scepticism about how much progress PsiQuantum has made," says Shimon Kolkowitz, a quantum physicist at the University of California, Berkeley. He calls a bet on them— That is, PsiQuantum— "extremely high risk". You've just heard an assessment of the credibility of the company's claims from respected global scientists. This is a company on which the Minister for Industry and Science has chosen to bet almost $1 billion of taxpayers' money. He's set himself up as the biggest, most risk-loving venture capitalist of all. The problem is that he's not putting at risk private money; he's putting at risk the money of Australian taxpayers. It's interesting to note that this article in Nature goes on to say: … some of the numbers are not as good as they need to be, says Graeme Smith, a quantum physicist at the University of Waterloo in Canada. For example, he says, the likelihood that a heralded particle is detected is reported as 26%, when it needs to be more than 50%. "It is not encouraging that, after many years, they are still struggling with good single photon sources, since it is the most basic building block of their proposed architecture," he says. This is further troubling evidence that the Minister for Industry and Science has put almost $1 billion of taxpayers' money at risk on what is a very high-risk bet. For these and other reasons, I have written to the Auditor-General requesting that the Australian National Audit Office undertake an investigation into the Australian government's investment in PsiQuantum. There are many aspects of what happened here which are very concerning. As a result of this decision, Australian taxpayers are now exposed to almost $1 billion of their money being at risk in a remarkably speculative venture. Australians deserve to know the truth. Groom Electorate: Healthcare Workers 108 18:56 Mr HAMILTON 291387 Groom It's Christmas time and, as we head to that time of year, we want to spend time with our loved ones and families. I want to take a moment to say thank you to those who are going to take care of us during this period in Toowoomba. It obviously has a huge health sector that looks after such a large region of South-East Queensland and northern New South Wales. So, everyone working in our hospitals across the Christmas period—Toowoomba Hospital, St Vincent's and St Andrew's down at Oakey—thank you for all you do for us. I thank our GPs, and I give a big shout-out to the Mary Street Family Practice, who have looked after my family so well for so long. I thank all of our pharmacies, many of whom came together and helped me through some pretty significant debates in this place over this time. Thank you so much to Chris Owen at Highfields in particular. We have seen a spate of very sad and unfortunate accidents in our region over the last week, so obviously the message to everyone is to stay safe on our roads. But to our ambulance crews, police and firefighters, the guys and girls who unfortunately have to turn up to those things, I want to say thank you so much for all you do to keep us safe, for looking after us and for being there in our worst moments. I give a quick shout-out to my rural fire brigade up at Flagstone. I promise I will come and do some training over Christmas and familiarise myself with the equipment again. To those across the aged-care sector in our region, I say thank you very much. We have so many people moving to Toowoomba at a certain period in their lives, and I just thank you for looking after some of our older Australians, some of whom will be alone over Christmas and so that extra care means so much. I say thank you to those at BlueCare and Middle Ridge who look after my father, Alan, and make his life that much better. Then there's the LifeFlight crews. Toowoomba has the busiest LifeFlight base. We see those helicopters just constantly flying in to Toowoomba Hospital. For all the work you do looking after people in rural communities who don't have health care on hand, bringing them into Toowoomba, goodness me, thank you so much. I would like to turn my attention to some great charities. I want everyone to hear what great work they do in our community. Loads of Love is one. Every Christmas these guys collect wonderful Christmas hampers and they look after so many people—unfortunately, it will be so many more people in the current economic situation we find ourselves in—making sure they have food on the table. Last Christmas, I was contacted on Boxing Day by a woman in a terrible state. She had effectively exhausted herself over the previous year looking after her four-year-old son who had cancer, and Loads of Love, with about two hours notice, when they found out about the state she was in, were able to get stuff to her—food, toys, presents, necessities and all the sorts of things she needed—on that day. That's what they are there for—to look after people. So thank you, Gus Romero the team at Loads of Love, who do so much for our community. The other one I want to talk about is Base Services. Base Services look after homeless people and give them a pathway to employment. They also do some other great things. They run a Christmas hamper campaign to help out homeless people in our community. It is so needed and it's such a worthy cause. To my good mate Nat, and Tiff: thank you for everything you do for our community. Ladies and gentlemen, if you are able to help out at all, they run a Christmas Day lunch for homeless people in Toowoomba. This is a great thing they do every year. Of course, having met them, you wouldn't expect anything different—their hearts are so big. It's a wonderful thing that they do in our community. For the kids, Toowoomba's Christmas Wonderland is on this year again. You will see the same exciting light displays that have been in place there for a generation. The Eiffel Tower, the Santa Clauses—they're all going to be there again. The Lions Club of Toowoomba West do a great job, making this happen every year. Last year, 58,000 visitors came to see our Christmas Wonderland. And what they do is: they support local charities that need that help. This year, those getting support are the Toowoomba Hospital Foundation, and Toowoomba Hospice—such a crucial organisation for us; and also Lifeline Darling Downs will be recipients of their work this year. It's a great thing that happens in our community—great charities being supported. In my final 20 seconds of this year, Speaker, if it has been the case that I have tested your patience whilst in the chair, I hope you will take this time, with Christmas cheer, to forgive me for occasionally straying and pushing the bounds. I appreciate all you've done as our Speaker. I wish everyone here, on all sides of the chamber, a merry Christmas. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Groom is correct; Christmas is a time of giving. The chair will be resumed tomorrow, Friday 29 November 2024, at approximately 7 am. The House transcript was published up to 19:01 . The remainder of the transcript will be published progressively as it is completed. The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Ms Payne ) took the chair at 09:30.

Thursday, 28 November 2024

The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Ms Payne ) took the chair at 09:30.

 

CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS 110 CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS Wentworth Electorate: Housing, SDN Paddington 110 09:30 Ms SPENDER 286042 Wentworth Affordable housing is a critical issue across the country and in Wentworth. There is a row of boarding houses in my electorate on Selwyn Street, Paddington, which is home to more than 30 residents, some of whom have been there for decades. These boarding houses are currently under threat of being redeveloped. The residents, many of whom are elderly, suffering from health complications and on pensions, have nowhere else to go in this community. They've built their connections over generations. This is heartbreaking. While I believe that development is an important part of addressing the housing shortage, removing low-cost and dense accommodation is not the solution. I'm grateful to the mayor of Sydney, Clover Moore, and the state MP for the area, Alex Greenwich, who are working on these issues. I'm very proud to be also working with the Minister for Housing, Clare O'Neil, to see how the federal government can support the retention of this incredibly important local infrastructure. I'd particularly like to pay tribute to the tireless work of the Selwyn Street and broader Paddington and eastern suburbs community. You care. You care about everyone in your community and you have been tireless in your efforts to stand up on this issue. You've organised a petition with over 17,000 signatures, and I encourage anyone who is concerned about these men and about retaining affordable housing in communities like mine to sign it. We must find a way to get through this. Finally, to the residents: I know this has been a horrible ordeal for you, but there are people in your corner and a genuine cross-government coalition ready to take on your fight. I'd also like to pay tribute today to SDN Paddington, a childcare centre in Wentworth. Tomorrow marks SDN's 100-year birthday. On 29 November 1924, the Eastern Suburbs Day Nursery was officially opened, having previously operated in Woolloomooloo, to provide help to working-class mothers. Known today as SDN, the one constant over the last 100 years is the centre's connection with community—the way that they uplift and build trust with parents and provide a safe and welcoming education to our young people so that our children can go into the world as the best version of themselves. A hundred years is an incredible milestone and one I know wouldn't be possible without countless staff and supporters, all of whom have left an indelible mark on both the children and their families. This is particularly special to me as my children went to SDN Paddington. I have very many fond memories of dropping all three of them at the door and knowing that I could trust this community to help my children be the strongest they could be while I did what I wanted to do in the working world. Thank you to the staff in SDN Paddington. I look forward to celebrating with you and the community tomorrow in person. Here's to many more years of building on that legacy. Heathcote Emergency Services Hub, Maldon Fire Brigade Awards 110 09:33 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo Recently, I had the opportunity and honour to stand with the Premier of Victoria, Jacinta Allan, and the Victorian Attorney-General, Jaclyn Symes, to announce that the Victorian government had secured land to rebuild the Heathcote SES and CFA facility, a purpose-built, co-location of these two important local institutions. The Heathcote CFA was established in 1902 and now has more than 45 active volunteers and averages about 75 callouts a year. The Heathcote SES has 25 active volunteers. However, during the flood event in 2022 and earlier this year, its facility flooded, so it is in desperate need of a new home. In the wake of the floods and the devastation that occurred across central Victoria, the government announced funding to build this purpose-built facility. It has become the envy of the region—to think that the CFA and SES will work together in collocation. A similar announcement has also been made for Rochester, which is just up the road and to be in the Bendigo electorate after the next election. I look forward to working with the community and both of these amazing organisations. I say this in the spirit that it is the bushfire season and awareness has officially started. I do want to give a shout-out to all of our local SES and CFA volunteers. As we go into this summer, we don't quite know whether we could be ravished by floods or by fire—hopefully neither. I want to give a shout-out to our first responders and our volunteers, the SES and CFA, because I know that, regardless of what might face us this summer, they will be active, they will be prepared and they'll be there to help people when they're most in need. That is why I also want to take a moment to acknowledge the Maldon CFA. I had the honour with my state counterpart, Maree Edwards, to attend their annual awards event, where some very special members received National Medals. The National Medals are presented to those who served in the police force, Australian Fire Services, protection services, correction services and emergency services for longevity, commitment and in recognition of diligent service to the community in hazardous circumstances, including in times of emergency. It was a special night, and I do want to pay tribute to the recipients Pam Lyons, Sean McCubbin, Luke Chaplin and Bruce Clements for receiving awards on that night. We would be lost in the regions if it wasn't for our dedicated volunteers and the professional staff that work alongside them. As we prepare for summer, I remind our community to 'be safe, be prepared', and I thank in advance the emergency volunteers who will have our backs this summer. Labor Government 111 09:36 Mr BIRRELL 288713 Nicholls I note to the member for Bendigo that, if the member is fortunate enough to win the next election, she'll pick up Rochester as a community. There is an amazing, resilient and beautiful community that you will represent if you win. They've been through a lot, and it's been a privilege to represent that community given what they've gone through in the 2022 floods. I thought I'd wrap up the year in opposition. You fight the good fight. You try and hold the government to account. Sometimes that works; sometimes it doesn't. When the government puts forward good legislation, you support it. I think people outside this place don't understand quite how much cooperation there is between the government and the opposition—and there's been some good cooperation even with the member for Moreton! But then you've obviously got to fight against legislation that you don't agree with, and we have fought against some of that legislation, whether it be the biosecurity levy; the community pharmacy deal—60-day dispensing—which seems like a good idea but has that terrible effect of putting at risk pharmacies in regional areas; taxing superannuation accounts over $3 million dollars, which is, quite frankly, a ridiculous plan because people might have to pay tax on unrealised capital gains; or the misinformation and disinformation bill, which was a dreadful bill that, thankfully, has not proceeded. I also think we were able to strengthen the response to the CFMEU. The Albanese government does continue down some paths which are damaging for regional communities, including mine. The biggest one is the Murray-Darling Basin Plan. The Minister for Environment and Water has tried to change that plan from what was actually agreed to, where there was a socioeconomic impact test for the extra 450 gigalitres of water, which protected communities like mine. To throw that out really has damaged confidence in the economy in my region. Governments should not damage confidence, but that has happened. I hope the Albanese government can reflect on that. I hope there's a new government that can actually repeal it. But damaging confidence in regional communities is a big problem, and the water legislation—the Restoring Our Rivers Act—has actually damaged confidence in the farming regions of my area. That's been a big problem because we grow some of the greatest food in Australia, which I hope can continue. We do need to revisit that legislation. Australian Society: Social Cohesion 111 09:39 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton Recent media reports have criticised the Australian government for its decision to deny a visa to former Israeli justice minister Ms Ayelet Shaked. The decision was made due to Ms Shaked's history of extreme and hateful comments about Palestinian people. Her comments include: Behind every terrorist stand dozens of men and women, without whom he could not engage in terrorism. They are all enemy combatants, and their blood shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there. Ms Shaked is advocating a war crime there. Another hateful quote: They have to die and their houses should be demolished so that they cannot bear any more terrorists. And another: They are all our enemies and their blood should be on our hands. This also applies to the mothers of the dead terrorists. Both of these propositions are in breach of international humanitarian law. Ms Shaked also spoke of turning the city of Khan Yunis, in the southern Gaza Strip, into a soccer field 'with the assistance of god and the IDF'. She also said that Israel 'should take advantage of the destruction that we will wreak upon them' to allow more people to leave. She said, 'We need two million to leave; that's the solution for Gaza,' and that other countries should 'shoulder the burden in order to allow them to leave'. The Albanese Labor government does not allow people to come to Australia and insight discord and hatred and division. If a representative of the Palestinian people were seeking to come to Australia after making similarly vile comments about the Jewish people or Israelis, they too would be denied a visa. To be clear: anyone representing any group who has made abhorrent remarks about other peoples should be denied a visa. People who promote hate speech have no place in our country. We are a multicultural country that believes in the rule of law. Australia is fortunate to have a successful multicultural society. This takes work, but I see the great outcomes every day in my electorate of Moreton, the most multicultural electorate in Queensland. Moreton is rich in different ethnicities and cultures. Our diverse groups work together, support each other and celebrate shared values, including tolerance for differences and respect for each other, and we all follow the rule of law, including international humanitarian law. The events of October 7 and the ongoing tragedy of the war in Gaza and Lebanon—although I note the recent ceasefire—are all deeply felt in Australia. Obviously, we have a lot of people with connections to these areas. We must remember and act upon our shared values and adherence to all of the principles of international humanitarian law, as we support all those in our communities who continue to be affected by this war. That is why the Australian government cancelled the visa of Ms Ayelet Shaked. It was a good decision based on the best interests of this nation. Energy 112 09:42 Mr BOYCE 299498 Flynn I would like to make a contribution this morning about energy and how it is affecting my electorate of Flynn in Central Queensland. There are 86 renewable energy projects that we are aware of and are dealing with in Central Queensland, and this is creating an enormous amount of angst within the communities. This was deliberate on the part of the previous Queensland government, under code 23 of the Planning Act and code 16 of the Vegetation Management Act, which have been deliberately designed so that people have no recourse to oppose these projects. There are some problems, and I would like to make a prediction with respect to many of these renewable energy projects. That is that many of them do have their approvals; however, they do not have financial closure from the international companies and the boardrooms or the proponents that are proposing them. The reason is that the Australian Energy Market Operator has not given them connection licences or generation licences, because the grid is absolutely swamped during the daytime with renewable energy. The problem is that the offtake agreements that many of these proposals rely on are things like green hydrogen, pumped hydro, battery storage, desal plants and all of these sorts of these projects—and, once again, these projects are years away. So I would suggest that many of the boardrooms are pondering whether to invest billions into these projects without the knowledge that they will be able to make substantial offtake agreements. In Gladstone, as we know, there is the Stanmore corporation, a Queensland government owned corporation which is proposing to build a huge hydrogen precinct at Gladstone. Their project involves producing 1,200 tonnes of hydrogen per day, including 800 tonnes of liquid hydrogen. If you look into the reality of something like that, it is an enormous undertaking. There's a guy called Saul Kavonic who is an energy analyst at MST Marquee and he has said this: … green hydrogen economics are so uncompetitive that even with generous government subsidies, and a captive buyer, it still struggles to work. The reality is that many of these offtake projects that will rely on green energy, wind turbines, solar panels and batteries, may yet not happen. That is why the coalition is proposing a nuclear energy option so that we can provide reliable, constant, base load power. Australian Training Awards 112 09:45 Ms CLAYDON 248181 Newcastle I rise to congratulate two exceptional people in my electorate who have been named finalists for the 2024 Australian Training Awards, which recognise excellence in vocational education. Dascha Harrison and Lachlan Carey are two of 75 Australians to be recognised for their achievements and will be heading to Canberra next week for the award ceremony. Dascha is a Year 12 student at Newcastle High School and has been named a finalist for the Australian School-based Apprentice or Trainee of the Year Award. She's undertaking a school based apprenticeship to help her prepare for a career in child and adolescent psychiatry. Completing a Certificate III in Health Services Assistance at TAFE, Dasha is employed at Hunter New England Health. She's not only shining in her traineeship but also in the classroom, on the sports field and in her part-time job. Lachlan Carey is up for a Trainee of the Year Award. Having faced his fair share of struggles, Lachlan decided it was time to pay it forward and pursue his passions by completing a Certificate III in Early Childhood Education and Care. Bringing his fun, nurturing and patient nature to every interaction throughout his traineeship, Lachlan was immediately adored by the children in his care. These awards are the peak national awards for excellence and best practice in vocational education and training, and I want to reiterate my congratulations to Dascha, Lachlan and, indeed, all of the other finalists from across Australia. You are all beacons for the opportunities that are available through vocational education, and it is a great privilege to recognise your hard work and dedication. I look forward to following your careers and seeing the transformative impact you will make in our community. The Albanese Labor government knows that vocational education equips Australians for the jobs they choose, with the skills they need for fulfilling and meaningful lives. As a nation, we reap the benefits of the education and commitment of vocational education students, teachers and trainers every day. It's fitting that each year we will celebrate their achievements through these awards. A vibrant vocational education and training sector is vital to developing the skills that we need both now and into the future. The Albanese Labor government is supporting vocational education and training with significant initiatives, including an investment of $30 billion over five years in partnership with states and territories through the National Skills Agreement and continuing our commitment to providing free TAFE permanently nationwide. So far, there have been more than 508,000 enrolments in fee-free TAFE since it commenced in January last year, with many more to come. Under a Labor government, free TAFE is here to stay because we know that this is investment in our future. That's our ambition for all Australians. Raise Our Voice Australia 113 09:48 Mrs ARCHER 282237 Bass I rise to share the contribution of Gregor, a young constituent in my electorate of Bass, as part of the Raise Our Voice Australia campaign. Gregor has written: Australian cityscapes, although globally popular and exceptional tourist destinations, tend to lead towards lower-density living compared to other developed nations. Accessibility to stores, educational facilities, amenities, public transport, healthcare and much more relies on efficient and lucid infrastructure. Introducing more high-density living into major Australian cities provides economic, environmental, and social benefits that will be critical to the cultural and financial growth of the country. More demand for public transport, along with an increase in convenient access to it, especially with the reduction of urban sprawl, would increase productivity with the decreased commute time to amenities. More populous living generally correlates with commercial and business hubs, stimulating job growth with the swell of populations within business districts. Australia is known for its urban sprawl, with nearly all residents opting for a standalone home and larger blocks of land. While notable Australian metropolises are home to larger quantities of high-density buildings, featuring apartments, high-rises, and townhouses, residents are spread throughout suburbs and the outer rings of cities. Introducing high-density housing in these areas would provide more affordable housing options and include sustainable environmental benefits such as a reduced carbon footprint, more efficient land use, and a more concentrated and shared use of resources and recreational facilities. Furthermore, a higher total population capacity would also provide the opportunity to introduce more permanent residents into Australia, which includes benefits of its own such as economic development, a more diverse and enriched society, a larger military, and an increased talent pool, all of which open up a million gateways of their own towards a brighter and stronger future of Australia. Higher-density development offers increased economic opportunities, decreased traffic, reduced urban sprawl and blight, lower costing infrastructure, an eco-friendly approach towards rising populations, increased property value, upgraded public transport, cultural and social progression with a concentrated populous, improved geographical management of educational facilities and accessibility to amenities; the list goes on. With concise and careful consideration and planning, we can make our cities more efficient to navigate, and more enjoyable to live in. Thank you, Gregor, for your thoughtful and detailed contribution. This was my last contribution from this year's Raise Our Voices campaign, where I undertook to read all of the contributions that were from students in my electorate of Bass. Corangamite Electorate: Road Safety 113 09:51 Ms COKER 263547 Corangamite Residents in the Armstrong Creek growth corridor in my electorate of Corangamite are angry and frustrated. Multiple road closures over sustained periods, a lack of communication from council and developers and poorly maintained roads are the key reasons for their discontent. I know this because I recently conducted a road survey after so many locals complained to my office about the questionable management of local roads in Armstrong Creek, Charlemont and Mount Duneed. The survey results reinforced what residents have been saying for some time. Many feel boxed in by overlapping multiple road closures. Others complain of dangerous road conditions and a lack of planning costing them time and money. Here's what one local resident, Bridget, said: I am deeply troubled by the unsafe conditions resulting from the roadworks. These conditions make it extremely difficult to reach essential services … without enduring a lengthy and perilous journey. Another local resident, Emily, said: It's so disappointing to see a lack of corporation for locals, and the illogical planning that is being done when works are undertaken. I'm urging council to act and fix the problem now. I've written to council twice about this issue, and my office has been in regular contact. In response to calls from community as detailed in their survey response, I urge council to review current and upcoming road closures to ensure timely access and egress for residents of the Armstrong Creek area; review the method and distribution of communications to residents, local businesses, traders, educational providers and emergency services to ensure they receive adequate notification of current and upcoming road closures; focus particularly on Horseshoe Bend, Boundary and Reserve roads, noting the federal government has funded an upgrade for the dangerous Reserve Road and Surf Coast Highway intersection, including traffic lights and turning lanes; and investigate federal funding opportunities under our expanded Roads to Recovery program and black spot program. I note that this morning council has stated they will review their communications. I do acknowledge that we have significant and rapid growth in Armstrong Creek, but it's up to council and developers to work together and to be strategic when planning the building, maintenance and access to roadways. As the federal member, I acknowledge I'm not in charge of local roads in the Armstrong Creek area, but I have a clear role to play in advocating to the city of greater Geelong to get better outcomes for my communities. They deserve it. They deserve safe, accessible roads. Energy 114 09:54 Mr BROADBENT MT4 Monash We know that disappointment is a lingering emotion, and we should be disappointed when governments tell us that four days of 30 degrees in Dubbo, 32 degrees in Sydney, a whopping 28.9 degrees in Coffs Harbour and 28.1 degrees Ballina is a wrecker for the power grid in New South Wales. You should be disappointed when the New South Wales energy minister says that it's very rare that we have five days of heatwave in November. That's what has caused this crunch, this problem. You should be disappointed; I remember lots of hot spells in November. If you ask ChatGPT, a five-day heatwave in New South Wales, Tasmania, Victoria or anywhere else is not rare. You should be disappointed when the Premier of New South Wales says: 'Please turn off your appliances. Turn off your pool. Close your curtains. Close your doors. Close down the house.' This is not the Australia that I expected. You should be disappointed when we're heading down the path of blackouts. You should be disappointed that, in the summer, we're going to be like a Third World country with our energy. You should be disappointed when you learn that, when we had coal power, we were never told: 'Stop loading the dishwasher. Stop washing the clothes. Please close your blinds, windows and doors and conserve energy.' Andrew Bolt was absolutely correct today when he said, 'It's infuriating that under the minister Australians now pay $450 more a year for their electricity, yet can't even count on the power grid.' We're shooting ourselves in the foot by not pressing our natural advantage in coal and gas. Those coal-fired and gas-fired power stations are going flat out at the moment, supplying the power that becomes such a shortage in New South Wales. As Simon Benson said in the Australian today, making coal the villain of climate change but also the cause of power shortages is extraordinary—extraordinarily stupid, dangerous and unprecedented. It proves that renewable energy is not reliable. You're disappointed that we're not harnessing our strengths and resources, capitalising on clever technology and rescuing this nation from the reckless renewable energy agenda. I dare say it's becoming very clear that the Australian people are disappointed in their leaders and disappointed in governments that have not put them first when it comes to energy. Tasmania: Community Services 114 09:57 Ms COLLINS HWM Franklin We all know that this time of year, as we lead into Christmas, can be a really merry and lovely time for so many, but we also know it can be a really difficult time for many Australians. I want to talk today about all of the volunteers that support those many Australians who have a difficult time at this time of year. I'm lucky enough to have some great local heroes in my electorate, and I want to talk about one of them today: Edna Pennicott OAM. Edna does some wonderful work and founded a charity called Kingborough Helping Hands, in our electorate. In 2021 Edna was named the TAS Local Hero for the work she does with Kingborough Helping Hands, which is a volunteer led organisation that delivers care packages of food and other essentials such as toiletries to community members who are in tough times. Edna also volunteers her time and resources to help women's shelters. She also operates an after-hours mobile van service that gives out hot food and support to people who are sleeping rough. She's the driving force behind Kingborough Helping Hands. Indeed, every year they have a Christmas fundraising lunch, which I have had the privilege to go to and which hundreds of local community members also go to to support. As Edna says, 'You need to go in with your pockets full and leave with them empty,' because she will take as much as you are able to donate to help those in her local community. They deliver over 250 hampers and over 300 children's presents from that one lunch, so it is a significant fundraiser in our local community. I also have my office as a nominated destination for a volunteer led initiative called Reverse Advent Calendar Hobart, where we have community members collect an empty box and fill it up—again, with essential items—for local community members. The organiser, Michelle Kerr, then hand delivers these boxes to food relief agencies for those experiencing food insecurity. This year's collection is worth about $34,000. These are just two great local volunteers. In Tasmania, we also have the ABC Giving Tree, which I have been donating to for more than 20 years now. It has been running for 36 years and has raised over $100,000 each and every year. That goes to a lot of local charities such as the Salvation Army; the Hobart and Launceston city missions; Vinnies; Home Base, formerly Colony 47, the Hobart Women's Shelter; and a whole range of other charities. I think it says that there are many people in the Tasmanian community doing it tough, but, importantly, there are a lot of Tasmanians who are giving their money and their time to support those in our local community, which is really what the Christmas spirit is all about. I'm proud to be part of a government that is also providing some cost-of-living relief to those Tasmanians who have been doing it tough through our tax cuts, our energy bill relief, more improved bulk billing, urgent care clinics, cheaper medicines and cheaper child care. We know there's more to do, and we want to continue to support Tasmanians. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 282237 In accordance with standing order 193, the time for members' constituency statements has concluded. BILLS 115 BILLS Workplace Gender Equality Amendment (Setting Gender Equality Targets) Bill 2024 115

Workplace Gender Equality Amendment (Setting Gender Equality Targets) Bill 2024

Second Reading 115 10:00 Mr KHALIL 101351 Wills Under the Labor government, the gender pay gap is actually shrinking. This was the news last week from the Workplace Gender Equality Agency, which reported that the gender pay gap has dropped to a record low. The Albanese Labor government has been absolutely committed to driving progress on economic equality. One of the main reasons behind the decrease in the gender pay gap is Labor's lift in wages for lower paid workers, especially in highly feminised sectors like aged care and early education. Many of us have been involved in both of those campaigns over the last couple of years. Our government wants to work with all employers to close the gender pay gap— A division having been called in the House of Representatives— Sitting suspended from 10:01 to 10:15 Mr KHALIL 101351 As I was saying, under Labor the gender pay gap is shrinking. That was the news from there Workplace Gender Equality Agency last week, which is reporting that the gender pay gap has dropped to a record low. The Albanese Labor government has been absolutely committed to driving progress on gender and economic equality. One of the main reasons behind the decrease that we've seen in the gender pay gap is Labor's lift in wages for lower paid workers, especially in highly feminised sectors like aged care and early education. As I said, many of us have been involved in the campaigns for increasing the wages for early educators and aged-care workers. Our government wants to work with all employers to close the gender pay gap and ensure workplaces are fair, respectful, flexible and safe. The Workplace Gender Equality Amendment (Setting Gender Equality Targets) Bill will enable us to work alongside employers to increase transparency and accountability in workplaces and, in doing so, help propel further action to close the gender pay gap. It will introduce a target scheme to accelerate action on gender equality by large Australian employers, and it will require organisations of 500 or more employees in Australia to commit to achieve, or at a minimum improve on, measurable targets that address gender equality in their workplaces. The targets will include both numeric targets, such as reducing the gender pay gap or improving gender composition roles or occupations, and action based targets, such as introducing a paid parental leave program where there isn't one in place or enhancing flexible work offerings. Despite the current high level of transparency in reporting to the WGEA, only 68 per cent of organisations have undertaken a gender pay analysis, and of these organisations, 75 per cent took action to close the identified gap. Requiring organisations to set targets can drive real change, as employers will be accountable for improving their results. The Labor government is committed to working with organisations to support them in our shared goal of workplace gender equality, because this is not simply about equality and fairness for individuals; it's also about the companies themselves, the economy and the society more broadly. The gender pay gap represents an estimated cost of $51.8 billion a year to the Australian economy. That's a remarkable figure. We know, intrinsically, how important gender equality targets are for addressing this problem and we know their flow-on effects. It's why we introduced quotas in our political party for women in winnable seats all the way back in 1994—a long time ago. It was actually the Hawke government who released the world's first Women's Budget Statement in the 1980s, receiving international acclaim and pioneering gender-responsive budgeting around the world. We are all witness to that foresight and vision of Labor and Labor women back then. Today, 52 per cent of our caucus are women, as it should be. That is a true reflection of Australian society. I also am very encouraged by the diversity in our parliament now, especially in our caucus. We not only have 52 per cent of women in our caucus; we have a real diversity of people from many different multicultural backgrounds as well. I'm one of those people. It is a much better reflection of the Australia that we represent. When women and people of all different backgrounds are represented—both socioeconomic differences and ethnic and faith differences—it is reflective of the people that we represent. That means better decision-making. It means better perspectives on the lawmaking that we do in this place, and that is as it should be. While the gender pay gap is shrinking because of the work of Labor, the recent dataset from the Workplace Gender Equality Agency has enabled the government to track progress and increase transparency on workplace gender equality and the pay gap. It show that there's still work to be done, which is why we have introduced this bill. It shows that the total remuneration gender pay gap reported by the agency is 21.1 per cent for 2023-24. As of May 2024, the average full-time earnings of women in Australia was lower than the equivalent for men by $231.50 per week. By the time they reach retirement age, women have 25 per cent less super than men—and we all know some of the reasons for that. Women also continue to be underrepresented in leadership positions, as they represent only 22 per cent of CEOs across corporate Australia. This is despite research finding a causal relationship between increasing the proportion of women in the most senior levels and higher company performance in productivity and profitability. I've looked at some of these studies. When you add more gender diversity and more ethnic diversity into leadership positions you start to see increases in performance, profitability and productivity and also—another metric—better decision-making. There's lots of research around that. Why is that? It's because women bring different perspectives to the table. People of different backgrounds bring different perspectives. They challenge ideas. There's a synthesis that occurs where better decision-making is encouraged and facilitated, and that can only be good for the organisation and for the people that benefit from that better decision making. Under this bill, the agency will work with employers to set and achieve targets, helping to build their capacity to achieve that change. The agency will deliver education resources and provide direct support to employers to undertake analysis, develop action plans and build internal capability to improve gender equality. Workplace gender equality also means equality in parental leave and superannuation. Labor has expanded our parental leave scheme, to a full six months by 2026, made it easier for parents to share care with a single gender-neutral entitlement, and added superannuation to the scheme. We know that women, on average, retire with 25 per cent less superannuation than men and are still overwhelmingly the primary caregivers, especially when a baby is born or a child is young. With our new paid parental leave, PPL, reforms we're bridging the superannuation pay gap whilst ensuring that working parents don't have to trade off their parenting years or grandparenting dreams, because every moment counts— A division having been called in the House of Representatives— Sitting suspended from 10:22 to 10:34 Mr KHALIL 101351 I was talking about paid parental leave and the fact that the government is working very hard on our reforms to ensure that we bridge the superannuation pay gap for women, ensuring that parents don't have to trade off their parenting years for the grandparenting dreams, because every moment counts, both now and in their retirements. We all know how vital it is for parents to have time to care for and bond with their child. This is for the wellbeing of the children, the parents and the broader community. It's a bit of a cliche, that it takes a village to raise a child, but it is true. Our hope is that with our superannuation and PPL schemes this village can remain large, loving and open and that parents can build and shape that village of support. There is still a lot of work to be done, which is why Labor has been driving equality for women across a number of spheres, and I will mention two of these. The Albanese Labor government delivered a tax cut for every woman taxpayer across the country this year. This was a tax cut of $1,649, on average, for Australian women. Under the Albanese Labor government, 97 per cent of women working in women-dominated or feminised industries—like early education, disability care and aged care—received a bigger tax cut compared with under the Liberal-Nationals proposed tax cuts. We also funded a 15 per cent pay rise for early childhood educators and aged-care workers, which, as you know, are both highly feminised sectors. It would be remiss of me today to speak about workplace gender equality and equality for women more broadly without acknowledging and paying my respects to the too many women who've died or been impacted by male violence against them—some 87 women just this year; it is a shocking statistic. When we talk about gender equality, we can't achieve this without the fundamental respect for women and for their lives that should be part of our normative framework as a society. This week saw the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, as we all know, and I want to reiterate my commitment—as an MP, as a member of the government and as a male in my own community—to be a role model for boys and other men in the behaviours modelled around respect in order to break this cycle. In a speech I made on that day, earlier in the week, I mentioned a story about one of my young female staffers. She's now 30, but she's never forgotten that when she was 17 she was walking down the street and a car pulled up and a bloke wound down the passenger-side window, leant over a small boy and wolf-whistled her and said a few things to her and then drove off. She was shaken. She felt disrespected. She felt unsafe. But also, think about what was going through the mind of that little boy. What kind of behaviour was that little kid being shown or having modelled? So, when we talk about trying to end that kind of behaviour and trying to model respectful behaviour, it's not just about stopping that—that's just a neutral point—but I think also about how we have to model positive, respectful behaviours towards women. That's our responsibility as men in our community, working with the boys and the younger males in our community, whether at sporting clubs, at schools or wherever boys and men congregate, to continually offer that positive role-modelling behaviour. It's hard to do, but it's important work, because there's a tsunami of negative models, if you like, on social media. We know the influence of social media on young boys and men and the effect it's having on them. So, everything that we can do, not just as a government but also as individuals and as members of society taking our responsibility really seriously, is important. I've always said that every time we can disagree peacefully or respectfully, even if we have a big disagreement, we add to social cohesion. Every time we can demonstrate positive male behaviour to a young boy, we're adding to that effort to make larger the range of respectful behaviours that boys and men should show towards women, and the onus is on all of us to do that work. I genuinely believe that the National Action Plan to End Violence against Women and Children in a generation will help end what is a national crisis. For my part, I'm going to continue to work tirelessly—both in a personal sense, as I've said, and in a professional sense as a lawmaker here—to make that contribution. And I want to be clear: this bill represents a world-first scheme. It's unique. It's a world-first. No other country in the world requires businesses to commit to gender equality targets. Australia and the Albanese Labor government will be leading the way if we pass this bill. I hope that we get support from the crossbench and from the opposition to accelerate action on gender equality in workplaces. This scheme is a reflection of the visionary values that only Labor governs by—equality of opportunity for all, regardless of gender, ethnicity, faith or social or economic station. It's about making sure that there is that equality of opportunity for all Australians. I encourage my colleagues to support this very important bill and have it pass through both houses. 10:40 Ms DANIEL 008CH Goldstein I thank the member for Wills for his comments, particularly in relation to involving men and boys in the process that we are trying to achieve, which is to keep women and girls safe. Of course, women in Goldstein and across the country want secure work and respect. This is what the Women's Economic Equality Taskforce found when it interviewed thousands of Australian women, and to achieve this we must, as a nation, advance gender equality in the workplace. As it stands, we're still a long way off. Despite some progress in recent years, Australian women don't have economic equality. Australia ranks equal first for women's education but is much lower down the list for women's economic opportunity. Australian women are much less likely to work full-time than women in many other OECD countries. Gender segregation persists across the economy. Most casual workers are women. Women do most of the care work, which is generally low paying. In the early childhood education and care sector, for example, 92 per cent of workers are women. And there is a stubborn gender pay gap of 21.1 per cent. The moral argument for gender equality in the workplace speaks for itself. Women and men should have a right to equal participation in work, and all employees should have access to equal opportunities in advancing their careers. It's simply the right thing to do, and it also makes really good economic sense. A broader talent pool creates a better environment for generating ideas and better decision-making, and this improves the bottom line. But creating a culture that values diversity and equality doesn't just magically happen. Systemic barriers and attitudes that stop women from advancing their careers don't just disappear by themselves. This requires intervention. Targets provide a disciplined approach to drive change. They help focus attention on change and keep organisations on track to achieving that change. Setting targets also creates competition between industry peers and makes very clear to any potential employee which businesses are creating an equal and respectful environment. Research by economist Dr Leonora Risse found that target setting for gender equality promotes accountability, transparency and organisational confidence. The Workplace Gender Equality Amendment (Setting Gender Equality Targets) Bill 2024 amends the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012 to improve gender equality in employment and in the workplace, and it does this by implementing the recommendations of the 2021 review into the act. The bill would require employers with 500 or more employees to commit to achieve, or at a minimum improve on, measurable genuine targets to improve gender equality in their workplaces and accelerate progress in closing the gender pay gap. Employers will select at least three targets from the menu of targets which are aligned to the Workplace Gender Equality Agency's gender equality indicators. The targets include both numeric targets, such as reducing the gender pay gap and improving gender composition in roles or occupations, and action based targets, such as introducing a paid parental leave program or enhancing flexible work conditions. Employers will then have three years to improve on or achieve the targets. The selection of targets and the timeframe will give employers the flexibility to act in the areas that require the most attention in their workplaces. I note that some in the business sector are concerned about large employers having to meet their targets to secure government contracts. Their concern is that it's an unnecessary additional requirement. It's important that business is supportive of and supported to participate in this. Systems change requires all of us to step into the process, and I strongly encourage government and business to work together to iron out any bumps. However, this information is already being captured and provided to WGEA, so it's not really an additional burden. It's about setting a target to work towards and providing a bit more rigour and structure around the information already being collected by businesses. I do believe that targets are needed so we all clearly know where we're trying to go. This bill extends the work that WGEA is already doing to create equality in the workplace, including the publishing of gender pay gaps for private sector employers with more than 100 staff. The data, which covers almost 5,000 Australian companies, reveals wide gaps across all sectors. The latest annual employer census by WGEA shows female chief executives and heads of business are paid an average of $158,632 less than their male counterparts. Pay gap transparency is something I called for at the Jobs and Skills Summit in 2022, very soon after the last election. I did this because publishing employer pay gaps creates the transparency and accountability needed to close the gap more quickly. Piece by piece, the government is building towards gender equality in the workplace, but we must step up the pace. There is still a mountain of work to do, if women are to have the same rights and opportunities as men. At the most basic level, we need to value the care economy and harness its potential. The care sector is undervalued because it's an area of the economy that we don't think of as being productive or about investment. This attitude is slowly changing and it must, for the sake of the country. It's not widely understood that the care economy is the largest single employer in Australia, with over 1.8 million people, 80 per cent of whom are women, currently working in care economy jobs. It's also our fastest-growing sector, as measured by job growth, by a long way. Building from that, we must accelerate the steps towards a universal early childhood education and care system. The Productivity Commission report recommends three days of free or low-cost set-fee early childhood education and care by 2036. I agree that we should be working towards three days of free or low-cost ECEC as a first step, but this time line isn't nearly ambitious enough. This should be a legislated entitlement. Without it being legislated, the cost to parents will continue to skyrocket due to there being no limit on the out-of-pocket fees that providers can charge. Tinkering around the edges will not deliver the kinds of changes that we need to see to make ECEC accessible and affordable. We need to reshape the system. As I keep saying in this place and elsewhere, accessible, affordable, high-quality early childhood education and care is a win for children, families, women and the economy. We must also take action to address the gender super gap. Leading up to retirement, the median superannuation balance for women is a third less than that of men. This translates to around $50,000 less, on average. I'd like to finish with some bold leadership targets. Despite some progress in the last few years, women are still significantly underrepresented in leadership positions in the Australian workforce. Women make up just 22 per cent of CEOs, 37 per cent of key management personnel and 42 per cent of managers in Australia, according to 2023 figures from WGEA. The same figures show that 34 per cent of board members are women, while one-in-four boards have no women at all. It's what the agency calls 'seniority drop-off', where the proportion of women decreases as the level of management and responsibility increases. To address this, Chief Executive Women is advocating for all executive leadership teams to be comprised of 40 per cent women and 40 per cent men, with the remaining 20 per cent flexible to any gender: 40:40:20 by 2030. We need to be ambitious and embrace this target. I read in a newspaper article last week that gender equality targets risk generating blowback among men who feel they're blamed for what's happened in the past. This view fails to recognise that inequality in the workplace is not just something from a bygone era; it continues today. Setting targets is not about apportioning blame. Targets are about addressing imbalances and creating fair workplaces for women and business to thrive, which will benefit all of us. The Goldstein community elected me on a platform of gender equality, and at every opportunity I will continue to work with the government to improve women's economic security and opportunities and, by extension, women's safety. It is appropriate to be debating this legislation amid the 16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence. Setting gender equality targets in workplaces is another piece of this very important picture, and I commend this bill to the House. 10:49 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton In May 2022, the Albanese Labor government received a mandate from the country to progress gender equity issues in Australia. We've been working hard ever since to do just that. We've been focused on putting women and gender equality front and centre of Australia's economic plan and we're determined to make women's lives safer, fairer and more equal. Labor leads by example. The Labor Party, in this 47th Parliament, is comprised of 53 per cent women, and it is a privilege to work alongside them. The Working For Women: A Strategy for Gender Equality was released in March this year. It details the actions required over a decade to reach the government's vision for gender equality, which is 'an Australia where people are safe, treated with respect, have choices and have access to resources and equal outcomes no matter their gender'. This bill is part of a wider framework of Albanese Labor government action on gender equality. We've increased the wages in the predominantly female sectors of aged care and early childhood care. These dedicated and hardworking Australians are finally being recognised for their crucial roles in supporting and educating our loved ones. We've made child care cheaper, which has provided greater flexibility for working families, as well as helped the family budget. Of course, we've made sweeping reforms to paid parental leave. These include expanding the leave to 26 weeks, more flexibility around the leave and also, crucially, the payment of superannuation while on leave—three great initiatives. This is what happens when you elect a Labor government. Today I rise also in support of the Workplace Gender Equality Amendment (Setting Gender Equality Targets) Bill 2024, part of the ongoing work which addresses the recommendations of the 2021 review of the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012. Specifically, it concerns the implementation of a gender equality target setting scheme to be administered by the Workplace Gender Equality Agency. WGEA is a Commonwealth government agency established by the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012. The act's primary purpose is to promote and improve gender equality, including equal remuneration between women and men in employment and in the workplace. The act is also focused on supporting employers to remove barriers to the equal participation of women in the workforce and ending gender discrimination, especially in the context of family and care responsibilities. It promotes dialogue between employers and employees on gender equality issues and looks to improve productivity through the advancement of gender equality in employment. We would all agree on these aims, and this bill makes progress towards them. It enables the government to work with employers to increase transparency and accountability, with the aim of closing the gender pay gap. That's why the bill requires businesses to set targets for gender equality. If you're not convinced of the need for this, you only need to consider the gender pay gap statistics. WGEA reported that the total gender pay gap was 21.1 per cent in 2023-24. That includes base salary, overtime bonuses and additional payments. When CEO pay is added, it increases to 21.8 per cent. In May this year, an average full-time woman worker in Australia was earning less than an average full-time male worker by over $231 per week. Obviously, this compounds over time, and, when you add time off for raising a family, it means that women reach retirement age with 25 per cent less in their superannuation accounts than males. As the Women's Budget Statement in May this year reflected: This gap is driven by a range of factors, including differences in gender representation and remuneration across occupations and industries, the impact of caring responsibilities on patterns of work, and gender discrimination and bias. These factors are complex, interrelated and can often compound over a woman's lifetime. We all know what the term 'glass ceiling' means, and, unfortunately, it's still an apt description of the experience of many women in the workplace. Women continue to be underrepresented in leadership positions in companies. Currently, sadly, only 22 per cent of CEOs are women and they only hold 20 per cent of chair positions and 32 per cent of board member positions. A staggering 25 per cent of organisations have no women on their boards at all. These figures are why this bill is so important. It puts in place a scheme to require large Australian employers to incorporate gender equality targets. That's organisations with 500 or more employees. They will then have to commit to measurable targets to improve gender equality. Over time, this will positively impact workplace culture, produce change in these companies and, dare I say, trickle down to smaller companies as well. There is flexibility for employers when it comes to the targets. They can be numerically based or action based. They include the gender composition of boards and the workforce as a whole and also narrowing the gender pay gap. There are options regarding flexible working arrangements and support for those juggling parenting and caring roles. There are targets for the promotion of workplace consultation on these matters and, obviously, in relation to workplace sexual harassment. The WGEA notes that these focuses align with gender equality indicators and are areas that can be improved through target setting. In fact, target setting and action planning are demonstrated to drive positive outcomes when it comes to gender equality. This approach is evidence based and promotes accountability, transparency and confidence in the employer. The WGEA will be there to support organisations on their journeys towards gender equality. They will help employers set and achieve targets, and embed a culture of gender equality. There are resources as well as direct consultation services available. I encourage all organisations to take advantage of these services, especially as only 68 per cent of organisations have undertaken that simple thing: a gender pay analysis. Three-quarters of these organisations subsequently took actions to address the gap. You can see that there is work to be done, and this bill will ensure that work is undertaken. The government intends to work with organisations to achieve their gender-equality aims because we know that productivity receives a boost along the way. Businesses which set ambitious targets but do not fully meet them within a three-year period will not be found non-compliant if they've made progress towards these targets. Achieving gender equality in the workplace is not a punitive process. Rather, it is an encouraging and positive one. Of course, we do expect all large organisations to get on board with these sensible, moderate reforms. If organisations fail to set and improve upon their targets without valid reasons, they may be named publicly as non-compliant. Accountability is key when driving cultural change and improving gender equality in workplaces. Organisations which do make progress towards targets will qualify for a certificate of compliance from WGEA. This will be required as part of an organisation's eligibility to be considered for Australian government contracts. You can see that Labor is serious about driving gender equality; there are plenty of carrots and not really too many sticks. Businesses that promote gender equality benefit from improved retention. They improve productivity and safety and, obviously, they also have that enhanced reputation in the community. This is reflected by the range of stakeholders who were consulted on the bill, including the business sector quite extensively, the not-for-profit sector, the higher education providers and, of course, the women's sector. The Albanese Labor government intends for Australia to become a world leader in gender equality. In fact, no other country in the world requires businesses to commit to gender equality targets. This bill represents a key step along the pathway to gender equality in our lifetime, and I commend it to the House. 10:58 Mr BOYCE 299498 Flynn I rise to make a contribution to the Workplace Gender Equality Amendment (Setting Gender Equality Targets) Bill 2024. I'd like to start with an overview of what this bill actually does and what it hopes to achieve. The bill amends the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012 to require employers who have 500 or more employees, inclusive of subsidiaries, to select and meet certain gender equality targets and to report on their progress to the Workplace Gender Equality Agency. The bill also provides the Minister for Women with new powers to set targets and specify the rules in relation to the selection of gender equality targets, via a legislative instrument. It provides that, where an employer has not met the selected gender equality targets or demonstrated improvements within the relevant period of three years, they will be considered to have failed to comply with their obligations under the act. Under the Workplace Gender Equality Procurement Principles, relevant employers seeking to supply goods and services to government at or above $80,000 must provide a certificate of compliance issued by the agency as part of the procurement process. Consequently, such employees would be unable to provide the compliance certificate. It implements recommendation 3.1a of the 2021 review of the Workplace Gender Equality Act, which was a review conducted under the Morrison government. Recommendation 3.1a adds: … a new minimum standard to require relevant employers with 500 or more employees to commit to, achieve and report to the WGEA on measurable genuine targets to improve gender equality in their workplace against three of the six gender equality indicators. The review made 10 recommendations to accelerate change for workplace gender equality. Both the previous Morrison government and the current government have committed to implementing the recommendations of the review. This bill introduces new requirements for employers with 500 or more employees—designated 'relevant employers'—to commit to, achieve, or at a minimum provide on and report to the agency on measurable targets to progress gender equality in their workplace against the six gender equality indicators. The bill amends the definition of 'relevant employer' to explicitly include subsidiaries of parent companies with a 100 or more employees and clarifies that in a corporate structure a parent corporation is also taken to employ each of the employees of any of its subsidiaries. The bill also introduces a new power for the minister to set targets and rules in relation to the selection of gender equality targets. The bill gives power to the minister to set out the category of target which can be selected and how many of the targets to select. The menu of targets will be set out in an instrument to the act and will offer a choice to relevant employers to select targets that are achievable for them within the three-year cycle. In practice, the cycle for the target scheme is intended to operate as follows: year zero is target selection, and employers publicly report their selection of three targets to achieve over the next three years; years 1 and 2, the employer lodges their public report as usual; and year 3, the employer lodges their public report and selects their next three targets, which will be compared to the year 2 reporting data. From the data submitted, it will be possible to see whether the employer has improved upon or achieved their targets, and the WGEA will assess their compliance. Businesses with over 100 employees are already required to promote and improve gender equality in the workplace, including through the lodgement of annual reports containing certain information relating to GEIs. This information is contained in the Workplace Gender Equality Instrument 2023. This bill will only impose additional reporting requirements on businesses with over 500 employees. If an employer does not have a reasonable excuse for the failure to meet its obligations or demonstrate improvements within the relevant period, they are considered to have failed to comply with their obligations under the act. The WGEA may name the employee in their report to the minister, and the employer may not be able to participate in government procurement. Neither the bill nor the explanatory memorandum provide guidance on what would constitute a reasonable excuse. There are some issues. The legislation will affect over 1,650 of Australia's largest companies b potentially precluding them from supplying goods and services to the Commonwealth government at or above $80,000 in the following essential areas: accommodation and food services; agriculture, forestry and fishing; construction; education and training; electricity, gas, water and waste services; financial and insurance services; health care and social assistance; manufacturing; mining; and several others. Major contractors that the government rely upon would be impacted by these changes. The other thing this bill does is impose excessive ministerial powers, and the minister has also personal powers to set targets and rules of their own choosing by a legislative instrument with no scrutiny from impacted businesses. This creates the possibility of even more erroneous complication and burdens on business. The bill introduces substantial compliance requirements for businesses. Reporting requirements add red tape to the operation of Australia's largest corporations, driving down productivity in an economy that's already struggling under the compliance bill of the Albanese government's radical industrial relations and energy policies. Adding compliance burdens to businesses will also inevitably be inflationary, adding to the Albanese government's homegrown inflation crisis. Large corporates are captured in this bill, but what will be government go for next? It is estimated that this bill will create a further compliance issue for over 1,650 of Australia's largest companies. Should the government want to go further, next in line are small and medium enterprises, who are struggling with significant red tape and compliance burdens under the Albanese government. Whilst no big businesses have declared any meaningful opposition to this bill, they will likely contribute to the committee process in early 2025. I've got some issues with this bill. In my working career I spent many occasions working with women and working without women, and I have absolutely no qualms about women wanting to do anything they like. In fact, they should be paid equally to men. But the simple fact of the matter is that what we miss here is that we are not comparing apples with apples. Many women don't want to be CEOs of companies or take leadership roles. You cannot possibly compare women who are working in the childcare sector, as an example, to men who work in the construction industry. It's simply not the same thing. I've got no problems whatsoever with women wanting to be progressive and attain whatever career they want to, but the reality of it is that, everywhere that I have been, with whatever jobs I've done, women who participate get paid equally and the same as men do. Here we are in Canberra. We are all legislators. We are part of the parliament of Australia. All of us are on equal footing when it comes to being remunerated under terms and conditions in the workplace. Some of these things get forgotten in the whole process of where we're going with gender equality, equal pay and so forth. I think this bill is providing another level of bureaucratic regime oversight or erroneous red tape that will actually achieve very little in the respect of what women actually want to do. 11:07 Dr GARLAND 295588 Chisholm Honestly, I don't know if I'd ever heard more backwards attitudes about gender before in my life than what I just sat through today. I'm thinking back to my ancestors in the 19th century who were campaigners for women's suffrage in Victoria. I think they would be appalled that in the 21st century we are still hearing these views about women and women's work espoused by those opposite. I think they would be truly appalled and dismayed, as am I. I think that we should be really concerned, really worried about what it would mean if those opposite ever were in government again, because some of the changes that we've implemented that were deemed 'radical' by the previous speaker include paying low-paid workers in feminised industries a wage that they can get by with. We are talking about legislating a climate target and building a renewable industry that provides well-paying, secure jobs for people as 'radical'. It's really chilling and worrying to me that those opposite hold these attitudes. We have put forward the notion that equal work should be treated with equal value. Again, that is a preposterous, radical proposition according to the previous speaker. I am really worried about the attitudes of those opposite towards women, and I know people in my community are too. When I was campaigning ahead of the last election, gender equality came up time and time again when I was talking to voters in community. It was coming from men, women—people from all demographics and walks of life. They really wanted to see equal opportunities in this country for their children and for themselves. I'm really pleased that since the election of our government—the first majority female government in Australia's history—we've been working every day to drive progress on gender equality. We're taking action to narrow the gender pay gap, including through lifting wages in feminised industries such as aged care and early childhood education. I think all of us in this place can agree that those are really important industries. These are industries where the people who care for our loved ones work. These are people who keep our communities going and enable other people to be able to go out into the workforce and to participate. We've introduced cheaper child care to help take the pressure off families' household budgets and to provide greater flexibility for working parents. We've also delivered significant reforms to paid parental leave—these are reforms that Labor are really proud of—and we've expanded it to 26 weeks. There is now greater ability for parents to take leave when it works for their family and for parents to make decisions about who takes leave and when. We're introducing superannuation being paid on government paid parental leave. This is really important in terms of addressing economic inequality in a number of different ways. We know that when women are not able to accumulate superannuation in their caring years it puts them at a significant disadvantage in their retirement years. We've seen growth, unfortunately, in the number of women of retirement age who are living in poverty and for whom access to housing is a challenge. So when we are able to better create provisions for people's retirement savings we know that that will be good for them in the long term. We are doing a lot to support women's economic equality through improving gender equality in Australian workplaces, and that's what this bill is all about. Our government wants to work with all employers to close the gender pay gap and ensure workplaces are fair, respectful, flexible and safe. This bill will enable us to work alongside employers to increase transparency and accountability in workplaces and, in doing so, help to propel further action to close the gender pay gap. We know that when we set targets and are accountable to those targets it helps us reach those targets, and we've seen that in relation to affirmative action in the political party that I am a member of. Businesses will soon have to set targets for gender equality. This change will benefit not only employees but also employers, because we know that with gender equality in workplaces there are benefits such as improved retention, productivity, safety and enhanced reputation in the community. As I mentioned, people in my community really care about this issue and reward businesses who demonstrate gender equality in their workforce. In March, our government released Working for Women, a strategy for gender equality, to set a path to achieve our vision for gender equality over the next 10 years. Key to this vision is the government's commitment to close the gender pay and retirement income gaps through increasing accountability and raising the bar for large employers to take action. The dataset of the Workplace Gender Equality Agency, WGEA, has enabled the government to track progress and increase transparency on workplace gender equality, including on the gender pay gap. The total remuneration gender pay gap reported by WGEA is 21.1 per cent for 2023-24, which includes base salary, overtime, bonuses and additional payments. When CEO pay is added, the gender pay gap is 21.8 per cent. As of May this year, the average full-time earnings of women in Australia was lower than the equivalent for men by $231.50 per week. This means that by the time people reach retirement age women will have 25 per cent less superannuation than men. As I previously noted, we are unfortunately seeing real gender inequality when it comes to those who are living in poverty in their later years. Women also continue to be underrepresented in leadership positions, as they represent only 22 per cent of CEOs. Women hold 20 per cent of chair positions and 32 per cent of board member positions. One in four organisations have no women board members, and that's despite research finding a causal relationship between increasing the proportion of women in the most senior levels and higher company performance, productivity and profitability. We can see there are real gains to be made in achieving gender equality not just for individuals but for companies, the economy and society more broadly, because we know that the gender pay gap represents an estimated cost of $51.8 billion a year to the Australian economy. A division having been called in the House of Representatives — Sitting suspended from 11:15 to 11:52 Dr GARLAND 295588 Before the suspension, I was talking about the gender equality. We know that equality cannot be achieved while the gender pay gap persists. That's why our government is absolutely committed to creating a better, gender equal Australia for everyone. This Workplace Gender Equality Amendment (Setting Gender Equality Targets) Bill 2024 will introduce a target scheme to accelerate action by large Australian employers on gender equality. This bill will require organisations with 500 or more employees in Australia to commit to achieve or, at a minimum, improve on, measurable targets to progress gender equality in their workplaces. We know that target-setting and action-planning are levers for improving gender equality outcomes in the workplace, and there's plenty of research and evidence to support this. Research by Dr Leonora Risse, an economist and one of Australia's leading gender equality researchers, found that target-setting for gender equality promotes accountability, transparency and organisational confidence. Her research indicates that taking this kind of data-driven approach is itself a mechanism for change. Regardless of which targets employers select, the act of requiring them to take targeted action will drive a shift in behaviour by embedding practices that are likely to create positive and lasting cultural change in workplaces. The suite of targets that employers can choose from will focus on the gender make-up of boards in the workforce, the gender pay gap, flexible working arrangements in support of parents and carers, workplace consultation on gender equality and efforts to prevent and address sexual harassment. These areas align with WGEA's Gender Equality Indicators—the six key areas where workplace gender inequality unfortunately persists and where progress can be achieved through focused action. The targets include numeric targets, such as reducing the gender pay gap or improving gender composition in roles or occupations, and action based targets, such as introducing a paid parental leave program where there is not already one in place or enhancing flexible work offerings. The targets will draw on information that employers already provide to WGEA against the gender equality indicators. WGEA will work with employers to set and achieve targets, helping to build their capacity and to achieve change. WGEA will deliver education resources and provide direct support to employers in order to undertake analysis, develop action plans and build internal capability to improve gender equality. In creating obligations to set and achieve targets, this bill seeks to cement Australia's status as a global leader in gender equality. Targets will lead to a more ambitious scheme which meets community expectations and is in line with the broader momentum towards gender equality in Australia. As I indicated earlier, people in my community really care that we are leaders when it comes to gender equality. This is a world-first scheme. No other country in the world requires businesses to commit to gender equality targets, so Australia will be leading the way in accelerating action on gender equality in workplaces. The inclusion of a gender equality targets scheme further supports the Albanese Labor government's 2022 election commitment to close the gender pay gap by encouraging employers to taking action to close these and other gaps that have been identified in workplaces. Despite the current high level of transparency in reporting to WGEA, only 68 per cent of organisations have undertaken a gender pay analysis, and of these organisations 75 per cent took action to close the identified gap. Requiring organisations to set targets can drive real change, as employers will be accountable for improving their results. While the bill provides the opportunity for employers to make ambitious commitments through the targets scheme it also ensures that employers are acknowledged for the efforts they make towards progress against their targets. In addition, it ensures that they are not found to be non-compliant if they set ambitious targets and make progress towards them but are not able to meet them within the three-year period. The targets menu has been developed by WGEA following consultation with key groups of stakeholders to make sure that the menu targets are both genuine and measurable. These targets have been designed in consultation with stakeholders, including the business sector, the not-for-profit sector, higher education providers and people working in the women's sector. This bill raises the bar and the obligations on large employers who may also be publicly named as non-compliant if they do not set, improve upon or meet the targets without reasonable excuse. Large employers will be required to follow the targets scheme to obtain a certificate of compliance from WGEA. The existence of a certificate of compliance will be considered part of the employer's eligibility to contract with the Australian government through a procurement process. In this way we're using the lever of purchasing power to drive gender equality outcomes and boost women's economic equality. Effectively, that policy lever is worth $70 billion each year, so this is really significant. We know that we need to accelerate the pace of change, and now is the time to do it. The introduction of gender equality targets will build on the progress that has come before and position Australia for success to close the gender pay gap and improve equality for all in Australia. 11:58 Ms WATSON-BROWN 300127 Ryan The gender pay gap data is out, and it's mostly the same old story, sadly—a tiny improvement, but women are still earning just 78c for every dollar men take home. That's almost $30,000 less every year. This is a staggering amount, especially in a cost-of-living crisis. The small progress we have seen is thanks to aged-care workers, 80 per cent of whom are women, fighting for a modest pay rise. Let's be clear: it's not as much as they asked for and it's not what they deserve, but it's just enough to shift that needle slightly. It's progress, but it's not nearly enough. It shouldn't be this hard. It shouldn't be this much of an endless slog to actually pay women more, to value their work equally. The sad reality is that every single occupation and industry still has a gender pay gap in favour of men. For years we've been calling for an obligation to not only identify the gender pay gap but actually close it, particularly for large employers, so it's disappointing that today's bill, the Workplace Gender Equality Amendment (Setting Gender Equality Targets) Bill 2024, requires only employers with over 500 workers to take action. If you're a woman in a company that has fewer than 500 workers, the government says to you, 'Too bad.' In our view, that number should be reduced to 100 workers. We need more workplaces to be obligated to take this action. I do want to acknowledge that some employers are stepping up, many of them of their own accord, which is great. The proportion of employers that are conducting a gender pay gap analysis has actually increased, and the majority are taking meaningful action, based on the results. Nearly half of all employers are setting targets, and 68 per cent of them are aiming to increase the number of women in management—another good thing. We're moving in the right direction, but it's 2024; surely we can do better than this! We still have a leadership gap. Women make up just one in four CEOs and heads of business, and the gender pay gap for these roles is absolutely massive. We need more women in senior positions, and we need the pay to reflect the value of their work. In boardrooms, one in four boards still have no women. In male dominated industries, one of which I spent five decades in myself, that rises to 41 per cent, which is unacceptable. The government needs to be doing much, much more. As one example, the government could stop giving contracts to employers who maintain a gender pay gap and are doing nothing to close it. Unfortunately, though, this bill makes complying with gender pay rules only one consideration when awarding government contracts, and that's outrageous. Labor shouldn't be subsidising discrimination. If you're not closing your gender pay gap, you shouldn't get a contract. It's as simple as that. The LNP aren't even supporting this bill—the bare-minimum ask of them, and they're not even able to do that. Are we surprised, though? This is from a party that has an abysmal record on women's rights, a party that has railed against a woman's right to choose, a party that has repeatedly allowed hateful and misogynistic behaviour within these very walls. I mean, come on: appointing Tony Abbott as Minister for Women's Affairs? Who can forget Tony Abbott's exhortation to 'ditch the witch'—referring to the then Prime Minister, Julia Gillard? 'Disgusting' is the only word for that—Tony Abbott, who has so little regard for a woman's right to choose or for women's health that he said, 'abortion is the easy way out', a callous, cruel and untrue comment. What about the last time the coalition was in government? They cut millions of dollars in funding to frontline services for women. They presided over a decade of inaction on gender based violence and economic inequality. Under their watch, the gender pay gap stagnated, and access to affordable child care remained out of reach for all but a privileged few—a problem that I want to acknowledge we still have today, sadly. But let's be clear: the LNP have repeatedly shown their disdain for women. We can't risk going backwards. We cannot risk another decade of LNP inaction, ever. It's time to stop the half-measures. Women are absolutely over it. Women are tired of waiting for fairness. The Greens will keep pushing for real action to close the gap—not in 15 years, but right now. Women need to be paid what they deserve across every industry, at every level and in every role. While we believe this bill is a step in the right direction, we also know it doesn't go far enough. We support the bill, because it acknowledges that large employers must take responsibility for closing the gender pay gap. For years, the Greens have called for this action, and it's a massive win that some employers will finally be held accountable. But this is not the end of the conversation; it's a starting point. We'll continue to push for stronger measures to ensure that all employers are required to take meaningful steps towards closing the still-yawning gap. 12:04 Dr GILLESPIE 72184 Lyne The Workplace Gender Equality Amendment (Setting Gender Equality Targets) Bill 2024 amends the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012, and I would like to highlight that there are many practical impossibilities for parts of the Australian workforce and non-government, private employers, particularly in my rural and regional electorate. Admittedly, we don't have Microsoft, EY and SAP in my electorate, but we have plenty of big employers where this will really cause huge problems through either the gender target or the selection of the three items described, from the list of what will become mandatory. We have some very significant big businesses with several hundred employees, like the Wingham Beef Exports abattoir. There is no way in my known calculation that we will get gender equity among abattoir workers. It is a very horrific and challenging experience working in the slaughter room or in the boning room. Most women that I know couldn't think of anything worse, and that's why 99 per cent of workers in that side of the business are generally male. There is more of a gender split for people in management and in executive positions, but to put these unrealistic targets on some industries—I've been underground in coalmines and I can tell you it's rare to find a woman who wants to be stuck underground, but that's what the vast majority of the people working there do. In fact, all of my childcare centres are overwhelmingly employing women in childcare positions. That will mean they will have to set targets to get a whole lot of men to work in their business, which is totally unrealistic. Look, there are some men who work in child care—great. I think part of the problem for some of our children is that we don't have enough men in these caring roles; in the old days we had many more male teachers in the system. Does that mean that all the government schools and private schools—some of them have easily a hundred teachers on their payroll—will have to get many more men? They won't be able to, so they'll be in breach. I'm talking about boilermakers, steelworkers and workers like that. Human nature means that males tend to do this work because of its nature; it's physical, it's hard, it's dirty and it's relentless. Traditionally, they would have great trouble getting a lot of women to meet these targets. Sure, you can have targets for boardrooms, white-collar jobs and things like that, but, in the real world out in my electorate, we have many people who aren't in that space—and that's the problem. In the big cities of Australia now, even in this wonderful capital of Australia, there are two or three generations that haven't had anyone in their immediate family or extended family who's been in a greasy, blue-collar, hard, ugly workplace called a factory. In Sydney—or over in Queanbeyan, where I grew up—we used to have heaps of people working in factories. Now everything comes from China, and we order it online. We have a laptop economy, and people are working in air-conditioned buildings. It's part of the reason we are so vulnerable: we've lost a lot of that industry. I think you need a bit of a reality check, because, in my world, this won't fly. It will fly in some places, but I don't know if forcing companies to mandate that they have gender targets and penalising them if they don't by removing contracts will fly for these companies like EY and SAP. Even the minister mentioned in her second reading speech that we are going to use $70 billion worth of contracting to force people to employ people and to meet gender targets and all the other lists. I think that's going to be a bit of an interesting challenge. In her own words—I will just get her second reading speech—she outlined that no-one else in the world is doing this. Is that not telling you something? This really needs a reality check. There's going to have to be much more flexibility in this for many private employers who have more than 100 people. I know some colleagues here ran big civil constructing companies and got workers from all around the world when we built all the gas infrastructure in Queensland and the Northern Territory. Just about every one of those companies down the line would be in breach of this law. There is no way that they could maintain it. So this needs a total rethink, a touch of reality. By all means, get more pay equity, but in the businesses I have worked in—in health and administration—there is no pay gap. There's a pay rate that everyone gets. It's gender blind. Admittedly, in the corporate world, people get different salaries, but, when you look at part-time versus full-time work, because of the nature of how families have set up since time immemorial, generally a lot of women don't want to have a full-time job. It works for their family, their partner and their own personal choices; they would prefer part-time work. In the same vein, I would not be in a rush to take up all the parts of this bill. I would accept some of them, but, really, it needs a rethink. 12:11 Ms SPENDER 286042 Wentworth Workplace gender equality is extremely close to my heart. I've sat in boardrooms and, indeed, parliamentary groups where there have certainly been too few women. Gender equality is about more than just motherhood statements; it's about ensuring a diversity of ideas and methods and getting the best out of businesses and organisations. Our economy is more productive for it. For the past number of years, one of the leading drivers in Australia's economic growth has been the increasing participation of women across the economy. Economists from Stanford and the University of Chicago estimate the dividend from increased female participation and workforce allocation to be between 20 and 40 per cent of the rise in living standards since 1960. However, I am conflicted by the Workplace Gender Equality Amendment (Setting Gender Equality Targets) Bill 2024. On the one side, I am hugely supportive of the work of WGEA. Their data creates transparency around gender pay and equity in Australian companies, which has really lit a fire, frankly, under many businesses that I am aware of. This is something that I know the businesses I talk to think about, and there is much more transparency here in the Australian economy now than there ever was in the past. It is actually achieving results. We are seeing more continually dropping gaps in gender disparity, pay and other things than we have seen at any time in the past. I think this is absolutely fabulous, so congratulations to WGEA both for the data they collect and for the way that they demonstrate this and share it with the community. However, I do have concerns about the practical arrangements in this bill. I'll be honest: I'm not sure that what is being outlined in this bill will actually make a significant difference to gender equity and genuine differences in the pay and conditions and opportunities for women. This bill sits alongside previous legislation to implement 10 recommendations of the 2022 review of the WGEA act. Last year, this government passed the 'closing the gender pay gap' legislation—which I supported—that moved on recommendations 2, 3, 5 and 9 of that review. As part of that legislation, the government released a schedule of the recommendations, showing progress or completion against all of the other 10 recommendations. This bill seeks to implement recommendation 3.1 of the review of workplace gender equality and will require companies with 500 or more employees to select and meet gender equality targets and report progress to the agency. These targets will operate on a three-year rolling basis where new targets from the menu will be selected at the start of each cycle. While there are no penalties included in the legislation, the EM infers that failure to meet targets will have implications on government procurement. I have a number of concerns in relation to this. Firstly, I think the application of these targets is not overly scientific, and I'm concerned that it has the potential to become another tick-box exercise for business. For good reason, the list of targets is long, but it also relies on self-selection and self-reporting. It is unclear to me whether this would meaningfully shift the dial on workplace equality and whether it would start to be gamed by businesses on the basis that it might affect procurement. I am also concerned that, while WGEA has taken some really significant and positive steps in trying to improve the efficiency and simplicity of its reporting, it is still a very difficult reporting framework for companies to provide that data. I think the transparency that WGEA provides is excellent. However, I know that, in many businesses, it takes senior people a significant amount of time to complete the WGEA framework. My concern is that this is going to add to that without necessarily driving better outcomes. I am also concerned that it's not clear to me—and certainly not clear in our conversations to date with WGEA—how this works in different businesses that might be skewed more towards women. There are industries out there where women are a significant proportion of the workforce, in certain workplaces. I'm still trying to understand, from WGEA whether the purpose is to have fifty-fifty in every single industry, in every single business. What do you do with a business that has, for instance, 80 per cent women? How is that treated? To be honest, when we've had some of those conversations, we haven't had particularly clear outcomes and advice. So, as I said, I very much support the work of WGEA, and I would certainly be in support of businesses voluntarily setting and publishing these targets. But I do think the transparency and accountability that the current WGEA framework provides is actually the best way to get our companies, particularly our big companies, to move further on gender equity. I think that is much more powerful than what is being proposed in this bill. One other, additional question that has been raised with me by community members, in examining WGEA, is around partnership organisations such as law firms and accountancies, where different types of partners get remunerated in different ways. The equity schemes around partnerships mean that some aspects of gender inequity aren't really coming out in these statistics, particularly if partners are salaried versus equity partners. We might need to have slightly different reporting frameworks to do the right thing by this area. Those are some potential opportunities for improvement that I think we can make. As I said at the start, I really do think that WGEA does incredible work, and I think it is that transparency—shining a light on businesses—that is the best chance for us to drive gender equity, particularly in a tight labour market where people have real choices about where they work. I am concerned about some aspects of this bill which are really more about ticking boxes—which I think can be gamed and aren't actually particularly scientific or, in my mind, necessarily going to drive the outcomes. 12:18 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah I rise to speak to and support this government's Workplace Gender Equality Amendment (Setting Gender Equality Targets) Bill. Now, you can't be what you can't see. This bill creates a requirement to set gender targets and actually achieve them. I do welcome that. But it's not just about setting targets. It's about setting a standard. We—as a society, but business in particular—are moving too slowly in relation to changing and increasing equality and diversity within organisations. Women continue to be underrepresented in leadership positions, representing only 22 per cent of CEOs. Women hold 20 per cent of chair positions and 32 per cent of board member positions. One in four organisations have no women board members. This is simply not good enough. We know that there is a relationship between women being in the senior and higher executive levels of companies within the ranks and results in higher company performance, productivity and profitability. It is a win-win. According to a 2020 report by McKinsey & Company, companies in the top quartile of gender diversity on executive teams were 25 per cent more likely to achieve above-average profitability compared to those in the bottom quartile. Additionally, organisations with a strong commitment to diversity benefit from improved innovation, better decision-making and increased employee satisfaction and retention. That's why I do welcome this bill and the government's action on progressing equity in Australian workplaces. It is by no means perfect, and there are questions in relation to how it will work and whether it will drive that meaningful change. But we know that the current system is not working adequately. Despite repeated good intentions and a lot of talk, we're not seeing the progress that needs to happen. I do welcome changing the dial and increasing the accountability of big business. The reform in this bill can help to achieve greater gender equality and help keep businesses accountable for improving gender equality in their workplaces. The amendment will require employers with over 500 employees to set, achieve and report on gender equality targets including employee composition, equal remuneration, and the availability of flexible employment options and support for parents and carers. I think this is all really important data. I think it's really important for when people are looking at places of employment to understand the culture and the standards of a company. This will make it all the more transparent and hold those larger companies to account. Ensuring transparency is a key step in achieving better outcomes for women. By mandating reporting on gender targets, this legislation holds organisations accountable and fosters meaningful progress. Now I know many in business will say it is yet another reporting requirement, that it's burdensome and adds complexity. But, with respect, leaving it to business to do in a voluntary way is not achieving the results that are necessary. You've had years to progress this, and too many have given it lip-service for too long. That is why I support that this now be mandatory. The bill implements recommendations 3.1a of the 2022 review of the Workplace Gender Equality Act to bridge the action gap through the development of a gender equality target scheme for certain employees. This scheme will be the first of its kind globally. But let's be clear—it's not a silver bullet. As of August 2024, the Workplace Gender Equality Agency reported that for total remuneration the average gender pay gap is still 21.8 per cent. It means that for every $1 on average a man makes, a woman earns only 78c. That is not good enough in 2024. For older women, the disparity is even starker. Women aged 55 to 59 years are earning $53,000 less each year than men—a gap of 32.6 per cent. This becomes more pronounced when we consider that women over 55 are the fastest growing group facing homelessness due to their financial circumstances, and often have very little superannuation to fall back on. The gender pay gap is more pronounced when we consider the superannuation impacts of the gap. In 2023, the Association of Superannuation Funds Australia released data that found that the gap in superannuation balances between men and women began to widen from age 30 onwards. By the time they reach retirement age, women have on average 25 per cent less superannuation than men. That is a massive problem in our society. Gender equity isn't just about equal pay; it's about fairness in opportunity and support throughout everyone's careers—women's careers in particular. And what we're finding far too often is that women of a certain age have paid the price of being relied upon by society to be the carers—child-bearing and child rearing, but also as the carers of parents and older generations and taking time out of that workforce and that career trajectory. What we do need is more support to ensure that gender equality piece is there. Women need more pronounced workplace cultural change to embrace greater flexibility in work arrangements, as well as greater support for caring responsibilities. It is still something that as a society we rely on—the incredible amount of caring that occurs, which is not recognised or valued or remunerated in any way. When workplaces embrace this, we know it encourages a more equitable workforce participation and career progression, both of which can lead to reduced gender pay gaps and, ultimately, a better, fairer society. That's why the outcomes of this bill will be not just about a matter of fairness but about creating stronger, more productive workplaces and an overall stronger economy. The bill introduces essential targets, but targets alone can't deliver that transformation. Targets must be accompanied by genuine cultural change—accountability, mentoring and policies that support workplaces. That absolutely needs to happen for this to be effective. Then those targets can be effective. Achieving workplace gender equality is not just about fairness; it's about unlocking the full potential of our workforce and building a stronger, more resilient society. I do see that this bill represents a chance to set a new benchmark where ambition is met with opportunity and contribution is recognised equally regardless of gender. Question unresolved. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 249710 As it is necessary to resolve this question to enable further questions to be considered in relation to this bill, in accordance with standing order 197, the bill will return to the House for further consideration. ADJOURNMENT 127 ADJOURNMENT Housing, Queensland: Local Government 128 12:27 Ms WATSON-BROWN 300127 Ryan I was an architect for around five busy decades before coming to this place and I'm not here to discuss that, but I do know a thing or two about housing. One thing I know is that there is no reason, not a single reason, that public housing has to be both so scarce and so poorly designed. Here's the truth: public housing can be world-class and it can be abundant. In Vienna, for example, over 60 per cent of residents live in some form of social housing. In Singapore, it's 80 per cent. Much of this housing is of substantially better quality than many private rentals in Australia. Award-winning architects are designing sustainable, beautiful social housing all over Europe, and there are some great examples of it here. It could and should happen more. Amongst many housing projects I've been involved in, including public housing, I'm particularly proud of having designed the first purpose-built refuge in Queensland for women and children escaping domestic violence. It was also based on the principles of environmental sustainability, the primacy of natural greenery, and the modesty, beauty and dignity of life. At its centre is a beautiful, tranquil garden. We're in a housing crisis, but saying private development is the only solution is absolute nonsense. We can and should get the government back into the business of building homes and we can get the best design minds in the country involved in making them places anyone would want to live in. Our communities deserve nothing less. They also deserve to access good public services close by, like rhyme time. Mums and dads in Brisbane would know what I'm talking about when I say that rhyme time is an absolute lifesaver at our public libraries. But, I'm sorry to say, they're currently being gutted by the LNP. When you're a parent of a little one, one of the biggest challenges is finding something that gets you and your kid out of the house, provides a fun, structured activity and doesn't cost you anything. It's crazy how few options there are that fit this bill these days. That's why programs like rhyme time or First 5 Forever at our libraries up in Brisbane are so fundamentally important. I have really fond memories of taking my grandkids to toddler time at Toowong Library. These programs are so popular that they're often fully booked out, yet the LNP in Brisbane has decided to slash these programs by 25 per cent. The community's fighting back, though. The Greens have a petition of over 4½ thousand signatures, and we've helped organise the hugely successful Giant Rhyme Time, held yesterday in King George Square in Brisbane. Families had a ball while protesting these cuts. Let's stop these cuts to rhyme time and let's keep fighting for things that make families' and parents' lives easier: more free activities and spaces, more paid parental leave, a four-day week with no loss of pay. I want to touch another example of the LNP trying to remove community access to important community assets: Mt Coot-Tha. If you live in Brisbane, you know Mt Coot-Tha. It's a beautiful natural icon. If you've ever lived on the west side of Brisbane, in my electorate of Ryan, you love Mt Coot-Tha. As a life-long westsider, it's part of who I am, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Sadly, the LNP City Council is once again trying to wreck this incredible natural habitat, that is home to tawny frogmouths, gliders and even the enigmatic powerful owl. The LNP is driving a reckless plan to privatise a whole section of Mt Coot-Tha. For what, a luxury hotel, privatised spaces and pay-for-access activities, even possibly an expensive zip-line, which the community rejected back in 2019? This section of Mt Coot-Tha is currently a quarry that is well past its use-by date. It could again be a beautiful natural community asset. Type 1 Diabetes 128 12:31 Ms COKER 263547 Corangamite This week, the Albanese government made a truly significant commitment: $50 million towards finding a cure for type 1 diabetes. This announcement means so much to so many families across the country and especially to young Australians like Harper, a JDRF Australia ambassador from the Bellarine, in my electorate of Corangamite, Victoria. Earlier this year, I had the privilege of meeting Harper and her parents at my electoral office. She's an amazing young person full of courage and determination, with a beautiful smile and a precocious zest for life. Harper shared her story with me, and I promised I'd bring her voice to Canberra. This week, Harper and her dad joined me here in parliament for the JDRF Kids in the House event. Over 100 kids who have diabetes and their families came from across the nation to take part in what was a very special occasion, not just to catch up with other families to share their experiences about type 1 diabetes but to hear an important announcement from our Minister for Health and Aged Care: a $50 million investment in funding to find a cure for type 1 diabetes. It's so special that Harper and her dad, Matt, were there to hear the announcement of this funding. Harper, Matt and Katie, thank you so much for your passion and commitment. Together, our advocacy has reaped results, making a real difference. I couldn't be prouder to represent you. This $50 million investment will be delivered through the JDRF Australia's Type 1 Diabetes Clinical Research Network. Over the past 15 years, this network has already achieved incredible things: funding 83 research projects, supporting over 450 researchers, doubling the number of clinical trials and studies on type 1 diabetes and involving more than 10,000 Australians in vital research. This funding will now enable this amazing work to continue and expand to support projects like a world-first study looking at how environmental factors might trigger type 1 diabetes even as early as pregnancy; a prevention screening pilot program to test children for early signs of type 1 diabetes before symptoms develop and to work on therapies to stop the disease in its tracks; and research into groundbreaking medical technologies, such as using tools like genomics and stem cells, to develop personalised treatments—life-changing advances similar to what we've seen in cancer care. This funding boost by the Albanese government will change lives and build on Labor's proud legacy of supporting Australians with diabetes, from former prime minister Kevin Rudd's establishment of the Insulin Pump Program in 2008 to the first funding for this research network in 2010. Now, under the Albanese government, we're delivering life-changing access to continuous glucose monitoring devices and have expanded the Insulin Pump Program. There are also other groundbreaking initiatives focusing on prevention and treatment before diagnosis. We know that getting a type 1 diabetes diagnosis can be challenging. Some people face delays or difficulty in identifying the condition. That's why it's critical to ensure that our GPs and healthcare professionals are well equipped with the knowledge and tools to detect diabetes early, even before symptoms appear. Advances in the genetics of diabetes are also offering new hope. These breakthroughs are putting us closer to a future where people with diabetes no longer need to rely on injections or devices to manage their condition. While these advancements are exciting, there's still a long way to go. In 2023, type 1 diabetes was responsible for around 19,000 years of healthy life lost. In my electorate of Corangamite alone we know that there are likely to be more than 150 people living with, or as yet undiagnosed with, type 1 diabetes. These statistics are truly devastating. They emphasise why we must continue to push the boundaries, explore the frontiers of science and research and work tirelessly to make sure we find a cure for this disease. Harper, to you and all Australians living with type 1 diabetes, this funding is for you. Casey Electorate: Sports Club Infrastructure, She Won't Be Right Mate 129 12:36 Mr VIOLI 300147 Casey I've been working with the Mooroolbark Cricket Club, the Mooroolbark Football Club and the Mooroolbark Junior Football Club on a petition to upgrade the pavilion at Heights Reserve. Currently, at Mooroolbark, the change rooms are inadequate for the club's growing men's and women's teams. The facilities are outdated, overcrowded and lack the social space for our local clubs and community to enjoy. The Mooroolbark sporting clubs are growing, but their facilities are holding them back. Together, we have shown that it's time for Heights Reserve to have a fit-for-purpose pavilion. There's strong community support, with 2,172 signatures on our petition. I want to thank a few key Mooroolbark community leaders. To Polks, Shane, Craig and Wellsy: Thank you for everything you do for you clubs but also for the Mooroolbark community. Your passion for grassroots sport is unparalleled. Your leadership and commitment to the Mooroolbark community is inspiring. Together, with our local clubs and leaders, I'll keep fighting for the Mooroolbark community. Investment in grassroots sport is so important, not only to support the current needs of local clubs but to ensure there are opportunities for future generations to get involved. As a candidate, and as an MP, I've been working with the Belgrave Cricket Club and the Belgrave Football Netball Club to upgrade the pavilion at the Belgrave Recreation Reserve. Unfortunately, women and girls are often disadvantaged by outdated clubrooms and change rooms. The pavilion was built in 1950 and doesn't have the facilities that allow our community to come together. Belgrave sports clubs are growing, but their facilities are holding them back. It's time to upgrade the Belgrave pavilion to support thriving new women's sporting teams and to become a community hub for the hills. I will fight for this upgrade, and I need your support to get this done. It's time to kickstart the projects that Lilydale needs, such as an upgraded community hub at the Lilydale Recreation Reserve. Investment in local sport is so important for both current and future generations. Outdated pavilions and facilities often disadvantage women and girls. I'm fighting for funding to kickstart an upgrade to the community hub at Lilydale Recreation Reserve. While the important groundwork is being laid for this project, we need temporary toilet and change-room facilities so that all players have the facilities they need and deserve. Lilydale sporting clubs are growing, particularly women's and girls' participation. But their outdated facilities are holding them back. I'll keep fighting for Lilydale and the Lilydale sporting community, but I need your support to get this done. Last weekend I had the opportunity, with my daughter, to join the She Won't Be Right Mate fundraiser for mental health. It was a car show and a family fun day. I want to firstly thank Marcus, the key organiser, who has raised more than $60,000 for Eastern Health Foundation for mental health support. On the weekend we were able to raise another $23,000 towards that support. I want to thank all those volunteers—all the community groups that came together to make sure the event was such a success. Marcus showed true courage by sharing his story of his challenges in the past. But, as I said to Marcus and to the crowd on that day, when you go through tough times in your life you have a choice: you can let it defeat you, or you can turn it into a positive. Marcus has turned it into an amazing positive for our community. So I want to again say to Marcus and to those volunteers, 'Thank you, and well done!' It was a bit weekend in Casey. We had the Kilsyth— A division having been called in the House of Representatives— Sitting suspended from 12:41 to 13:20 Newcastle Electorate: Community Events 130 13:21 Ms CLAYDON 248181 Newcastle Earlier this month, I had the pleasure of attending UGL's 125th anniversary open day at their Broadmeadow depot. Starting as a business supporting the local coal industry, UGL has grown, diversified and developed into the modern engineering hub we know today. More than a thousand employees and their families came together to mark the momentous occasion. We even got to welcome back a Newcastle icon, the Tangara train, which was built on site between 1988 and 1995. The Tangara continues to service Sydney's commuters to this day and is representative of how great local manufacturing can be. As I reflect on this anniversary, I'm reminded of the people who made this journey, from the first engineers, tradespeople and technicians who built the foundations of this organisation to the current team of professionals who continue to drive UGL Broadmeadow's success. Each individual has played a vital role in shaping UGL's success. As we look ahead, the future for UGL is bright. The industries UGL serve are transforming, and the company is well positioned to lead in emerging areas like high-speed rail and renewable energy. With the Labor government focused on a future made in Australia and a determination to remove barriers to education and training with free TAFE, I'm certain that UGL Broadmeadow will continue to thrive for another 125 years. It was great to see so many Novocastrians in Parliament House last week. Firstly, I want to give a shout out to Brain Tumour Alliance Australia for hosting the 2024 Head to the Hill event. Families, survivors and advocates made their way to parliament to share their personal stories and raise awareness of the profound and devastating impacts of brain tumours. Pairs of shoes were placed across the lawns of Parliament House, each pair representing a person who had died from the disease. I pay tribute to Newcastle's own Mark Hughes Foundation, which raises much-needed funds for research, creates awareness and supports brain cancer patients and their families. I was also able to share a special moment with Lake Macquarie councillor Madeline Bishop, who tragically lost her husband to brain cancer. The following day I caught up with the fabulous Claudia Tolhurst, the CEO of the Hunter Melanoma Foundation, who was in Parliament House to raise awareness about the prevention and early detection of skin cancers. The Hunter region has the highest incidence of melanoma per capita in the world. One in 25 males and one in 30 females in our region will suffer from this disease. Tragically, one person dies every five hours. As we head into the busy summer period, it's a timely reminder to apply sunscreen, wear protective clothing, seek shade where possible and conduct skin checks often. It is our collective responsibility to bring down these staggering statistics. Hunter Melanoma will be doing free spot checks at Bar Beach again this summer, so make sure you jump online and book your check-up. It could save your life. Thank you to both of these important causes that brought their challenges to Canberra. I just want to give another little shout out to Teresa Brauer and her very brave daughter Gabrielle who were part of the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation group paying a visit to Parliament House this week. Thank you for sharing your personal stories of type 1 diabetes and your advocacy for increased investment. I was very delighted that the Albanese Labor government will support this next phase of searching for a cure for type 1 diabetes through a $50 million investment in a research project to be delivered through the JDRF program. I am delighted to provide an update to the House on the progress of the Hexham Straight widening project. The six-kilometre stretch between Sandgate and Hexham is a notorious choke point for traffic. Anyone who drives on this road daily will tell you just what a nightmare it can be. But, thanks to the Albanese Labor government and our investment of $1.8 billion, the Hexham Straight will be upgraded from two lanes in each direction to three lanes in each direction, and we get a new bridge, so we'll have twin bridges in operation. Last week, we passed a major milestone, with the new southbound bridge over Ironbark Creek now completed and open to traffic. It was only in August that we saw the first girder, a crucial part of that project puzzle, being lifted into place. These upgrades will benefit more than 50,000 motorists who travel between Newcastle and Maitland every single day, easing congestion, cutting down on travel times and, importantly, improving road safety. Work on building a new, second, northbound bridge will start next month. I look forward to updating the community on the progress of these projects. Rheinberger, Mr John, Eden-Monaro Electorate 131 13:26 Ms McBAIN 281988 Eden-Monaro I want to congratulate John Rheinberger, who has just been made a life member of the Merimbula Tennis Club. John, who has represented Australia on the world tennis stage, played at Bega for 40 years and has spent the last 15 years with the Merimbula Tennis Club. The club's committee has made John a life member in recognition of the work he does not only for the club but also for the larger tennis community across the far South Coast. Merimbula Tennis Club President Stephen Crammond said, 'John helped selflessly in in many different areas of the club'. He described John as the heart and soul of the club and says he sets very high standards for himself. The award was given for John's outstanding contribution, dedication and excellent service at Merimbula Tennis Club. He's a regular tennis player at Merimbula but also competes as part of the Merimbula men's team at Victoria Country Week annual grass tournaments. He's well-known to tennis players across New South Wales, Victoria and the ACT through his organisation of the Merimbula seniors' tennis tournament in which he also plays. He helps to maintain the courts and he works on the gardens and the surrounding areas of the club. He's also just been re-elected treasurer of the club. At 79, John is looking forward to competing in the 80-plus category next year. A huge congratulations to John and his family along with the Merimbula Tennis Club on this momentous occasion. We're heading into the holiday season, and I really want to encourage all of our locals across Eden-Monaro to shop locally where you can. There are some amazing retailers right across Eden-Monaro, and we should support and celebrate them during the Christmas period. I'm guilty of perhaps spending a bit too much time perusing the website of Birdsnest, from Cooma. But, if you're looking for something fancy to wear to Christmas lunch, drop into Debbie Maree's Fashion Boutique. If you want to buy a bouquet for a special someone, Queanbeyan City Florist will have gorgeous arrangements for you. Down on the coast, Georgies Fine Jewellery has immaculate collections of rings, earrings, charms, necklaces and much more. If you find yourself on the coast and need to get dressed up, drop into Swannies in Merimbula. In Goulburn, Country Outfitters stocks the latest trends, and Evolution Trophies has all your sporting needs so you can support your team. I'm only scratching the surface of what we have available across Eden-Monaro, so please get down, shop in your local communities and support our local small businesses. I am scratching the surface, as I said. I haven't even mentioned local produce or arts yet. Please go and support our local community. We are a beautiful and unique place to visit over summer. I haven't even talked about our beaches, our inland waterways or our mountains and national parks. Come and visit our beautiful corner of the world, but drive safely and take your time on the roads as you get there. Finally, I'm keen to let some community groups across Eden-Monaro know that expressions of interest are now being sought for volunteer grants for 2024-25. Volunteer grants support the work of our local community organisations with a focus on the inclusion of young people and promoting participation in volunteering. Volunteer grants have slightly changed this year, focusing on two particular streams. Category 1 is for volunteer organisations that need help with things like iPads, laptops, radios, phones or square payment things. We know our volunteer groups do such an amazing job. If you need help with any of those, category 1 is for you. Category 2 is specifically for organisations that work with young people under 18. They can use grant money for a whole range of things if they're supporting young people in their volunteer organisation. A community panel, including me as the MP, will be looking at the applications to make sure everything is transparent, and we'll sign a declaration at the end to say that it is transparent. This is a hugely popular program across Eden-Monaro, and I know lots of community groups will be keen to apply. Expressions of interest are currently being sought, and I encourage all of our cherished volunteers right across Eden-Monaro to put in one for your local organisation. I look forward to working with you. Question agreed to. Federation Chamber adjourned at 13:30