2025-03-25 2 1 0 House of Reps 0 1

Tuesday, 25 March 2025

The SPEAKER ( Hon. Milton Dick ) took the chair at 12:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.

 

BILLS 1 BILLS Early Childhood Education and Care (Three Day Guarantee) Bill 2025 1

Early Childhood Education and Care (Three Day Guarantee) Bill 2025

Returned from Senate 1 Navigation Amendment Bill 2024, Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2024-2025, Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2024-2025, Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2024-2025, Social Security Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes) Bill 2025, Oversight Legislation Amendment (Robodebt Royal Commission Response and Other Measures) Bill 2024, Health Legislation Amendment (Modernising My Health Record—Sharing by Default) Bill 2024, Future Made in Australia (Production Tax Credits and Other Measures) Bill 2024, Defence Service Homes Amendment (Insurance) Bill 2025, Customs Amendment (Expedited Seizure and Disposal of Engineered Stone) Bill 2024, Early Childhood Education and Care (Three Day Guarantee) Bill 2025, Electricity Infrastructure Legislation Amendment Bill 2025, Administrative Review Tribunal (Miscellaneous Measures) Bill 2024, Scams Prevention Framework Bill 2025, Electoral Legislation Amendment (Electoral Reform) Bill 2024, Veterans' Entitlements, Treatment and Support (Simplification and Harmonisation) Bill 2024 1

Navigation Amendment Bill 2024

Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2024-2025

Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2024-2025

Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2024-2025

Social Security Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes) Bill 2025

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

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

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

Defence Service Homes Amendment (Insurance) Bill 2025

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

Early Childhood Education and Care (Three Day Guarantee) Bill 2025

Electricity Infrastructure Legislation Amendment Bill 2025

Administrative Review Tribunal (Miscellaneous Measures) Bill 2024

Scams Prevention Framework Bill 2025

Electoral Legislation Amendment (Electoral Reform) Bill 2024

Veterans' Entitlements, Treatment and Support (Simplification and Harmonisation) Bill 2024

Assent 1 BUSINESS 1 BUSINESS Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders 1 12:01 Mr BURKE DYW Watson by leave—I move: That standing order 133(b) (deferred divisions) be suspended for this sitting. 12:01 Mr BANDT M3C Melbourne I seek to speak on the motion. Had the government come in this budget week and said, 'We need to reorder business to pass legislation to ensure that people can go and see their GP for free and triple the bulk-billing incentive,' we'd have entertained that. Had the government come in this budget week and said, 'We want to pass legislation to get dental into Medicare,' we'd have entertained that. Had they come and said, 'We want to pass legislation to wipe student debt by 20 per cent to ensure that it's protected against whatever might happen in the next government,' we'd have entertained that. We offered the government action on all of those things because, in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis, when we have been called back for a couple of days to sit, we should be prioritising legislation that might actually help people. But, instead, the government says, 'We've got to come back and reorder business to fast-track legislation to gut our environment and climate laws and to do a dirty deal with the opposition to fast-track extinction.' The SPEAKER 53517 On a point of order, the Leader of the House? Mr Burke DYW Just on relevance, the motion that the Leader of the Australian Greens is speaking to is not the motion that's before the House. The motion that's before the House is whether or not the standing order that would defer any divisions till after question time be suspended. The SPEAKER 53517 The Leader of the House is correct. I'm just giving the Leader of the Australian Greens some licence, but the procedure motion before the House is— Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Just hold your horses. Members on my right are not helping this situation either. People are interjecting outside of their place. Any member on their feet has the right to debate. Everyone on my right can just cease interjecting. But this is to deal with the standing order, so, if you wish to address the motion, you can, but you'll need to be relevant to the motion before the House before we get to other motions. Mr BANDT M3C Okay. This is a motion to reorder the business of the next couple of hours to allow divisions to occur in the next couple of hours. Usually at this time on a Tuesday there are no divisions occurring. Why is it that, in a sitting that many people didn't expect to have and with a couple of days of sitting left, the government says, 'We want to change the way things are done usually to allow for more divisions to happen and more votes to happen to allow legislation to be fast-tracked through this place'? That's what the divisions are for. Why is the government wanting to do that? It's not to wipe student debt. It's not to ensure that people can go and see the GP for free and that we Dutton-proof that legislation. No. It's to bring legislation to this place and ensure that the normal order of doing things is reorganised so that they can fast-track the extinction of a species in Tasmania and introduce legislation that will gut our climate and environment laws. That is why they are moving this motion to allow for, over the next couple of hours, votes to take place on legislation that was seen a couple of days ago that hasn't been through the usual Senate inquiry process and that will not address the cost-of-living crisis that people are under when we are called back here for a budget. They will instead act, simply because the big corporations and the Leader of the Opposition have said, 'Jump,' and the Prime Minister has said, 'How high?' The legislation which the suspension motion from the Leader of the House is designed to fast-track over the next couple of hours by rearranging the way things are usually done will not address the cost-of-living crisis that people find themselves under. That is not the government's priority in moving this motion. They have shown absolute unwillingness to legislate even their own measures, which they say are so important. They want to hold wiping student debt by 20 per cent ransom to the outcome of the election. They won't bring a motion to this parliament to say, 'Let's pass that now.' Let's legislate seeing the GP for free and tripling the bulk-billing incentive—an idea of the Greens that they've adopted. No. We won't bring a motion to parliament to re-order business and to allow debate and divisions to happen to ensure that that progresses today. No. What this motion is about is ensuring that, over the next couple of hours, the government fast-tracks legislation that will make a species extinct, and—not just that!—the government says, 'Please pass this motion so that we can debate this legislation.' You know what, Mr Speaker? There's a reason that they're not prepared to put this to a Senate inquiry and, instead, want to go through this dodgy process here now to allow divisions to happen at a time when usually there would not be divisions. The reason that that is being proposed is to hide scrutiny of just how wide ranging this bill is. The SPEAKER 53517 Order. The Leader of the Greens will resume his seat for a moment. The Leader of the House? Mr Burke DYW I rise on a point of order of relevance to the motion that's before us, again. It might be of some assistance—while the Leader of the Greens is referring to reordering of business that might be moved in subsequent motions, the bill that he's referring to is actually scheduled to be debated and voted on this afternoon. This standing order is irrelevant to divisions that happen after 2 pm. The resolution that we have now basically determines whether or not we can deal with supply bills and whether we can deal with a transport security bill before we get to question time. The legislation that he's referring to is legislation that—even on what's going to be moved subsequently and even if that were somehow relevant—is completely outside the ambit of the motion that's before the House right now. The SPEAKER 53517 To assist the House—it's a big day today—could the Leader of the Greens just stick to the motion regarding the standing order. I know he's bringing other materials in, but I just want him to be directly relevant to the standing order, 133(b), which is before the House now as we're making the decision whether the deferred divisions will occur or not. Mr BANDT M3C Of course those other bills can be progressed through this parliament, but what the government knows that it is trying to do is to ensure that, over the next few hours, passage is cleared, including by moving any procedural motions and having any divisions on them that are necessary, for an unprecedented piece of legislation to be put through this parliament today. That's what the government is attempting to lay the groundwork for in this motion—to allow unprecedented legislation that has not been to an inquiry, that will have wide-ranging implications not just for the fast-tracking of a species to extinction but also to allow coal and gas projects to be approved, to allow other environment destruction to take place and to remove the communities' right to oppose that. The government knows full well what it is trying to do, which is to clear the procedural decks to allow the fast-tracking of legislation that will fast-track a species to extinction and open up massive loopholes in our environment laws that other coal and gas corporations and other huge developers are going to be able to drive their way through. The government knows that. The government knows that absolutely. We'll oppose this attempt to reorder and clear the procedural decks so that the government can fast-track this terrible legislation through. I urge the government in the remaining time that it's got, as it's considering the procedural motions that it's putting here, to go back to the drawing board and say: 'Let's use these next couple of days to pass legislation that will benefit people, that will wipe student debt, that will triple the bulk-billing incentive and that will get dental into Medicare. Let's use it to do that, not to fast-track a species to extinction and to gut our climate and environment laws.' The SPEAKER 53517 The question before the House is that the motion be agreed to.  

The House divided. [12:16]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

 86 AYES Albanese, A. N. Aly, A. Ananda-Rajah, M. Andrews, K. L. Belyea, J. A. Bowen, C. E. Buchholz, S. 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. Fernando, C. Fletcher, P. W. Freelander, M. R. Garland, C. M. L. Georganas, S. Giles, A. J. Goodenough, I. R. Gorman, P. Gosling, L. J. Hastie, A. W. 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. Ley, S. P. Lim, S. B. C. Marles, R. D. Mascarenhas, Z. F. A. McBain, K. L. McBride, E. M. Miller-Frost, L. J. Mitchell, B. K. Mitchell, R. G. Mulino, D. Neumann, S. K. O'Connor, B. P. J. O'Neil, C. E. Payne, A. E. Perrett, G. D. Phillips, F. E. Pike, H. J. 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. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Sukkar, M. S. Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Vamvakinou, M. van Manen, A. J. Wallace, A. B. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. Wilson, J. H. Zappia, A. 12 NOES Bandt, A. P. (Teller) Bates, S. J. Chandler-Mather, M. Chaney, K. E. Daniel, Z. Haines, H. M. Ryan, M. M. Spender, A. M. Steggall, Z. Tink, K. J. Watson-Brown, E. Wilkie, A. D. (Teller) 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders 4 12:18 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I move: That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the following: (1) on Tuesday, 25 March 2025: (a) standing orders 31 (automatic adjournment of the House) and 33 (limit on business after normal time of adjournment) being suspended for the sitting; and (b) the Federation Chamber not meeting; (2) on Thursday, 27 March 2025: (a) standing order 31 (automatic adjournment of the House) being suspended for the sitting; and (b) after the Leader of the Opposition completes his reply to the Budget speech, the House automatically standing adjourned until 10 am on Monday, 7 April 2025, unless the Speaker or, in the event of the Speaker being unavailable, the Deputy Speaker, fixes an alternative day or hour of meeting; and (3) any variation to this arrangement being made only on a motion moved by a Minister. For the benefit of the House, this is the standard motion that is moved in budget week each year. Question agreed to. Consideration of Legislation 4 12:20 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I move: That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the following on Tuesday, 25 March 2025: (1) after the introduction of Supply Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026, Supply Bill (No. 2) 2025-2026 and Supply (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026, debate on each bill being adjourned until a later hour; (2) Ministers introducing the Parliamentary Business Resources Legislation Amendment (Machinery of Government Change) Bill 2025 and Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Reconsiderations) Bill 2025 without notice and debate on each bill being adjourned until a later hour; (3) when the order of the day for the resumption of debate on Supply Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026 is called on, a cognate debate taking place with Supply Bill (No. 2) 2025-2026 and Supply (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026; (4) immediately following the discussion of a matter of public importance, if the Transport Security Amendment (Security of Australia's Transport Sector) Bill 2024, Supply Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026, Supply Bill (No. 2) 2025-2026, Supply (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026 and Parliamentary Business Resources Legislation Amendment (Machinery of Government Change) Bill 2025 have not passed, all questions necessary to complete consideration of the bills being put immediately; (5) following the passage of the bills listed in (4), the resumption of debate on the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Reconsiderations) Bill 2025 being called on immediately and all questions necessary to complete consideration of the bill being put at no later than 5.45 pm; and (6) any variation to this arrangement being made only on a motion moved by a Minister. Members would be aware of the different bills that the government is seeking to get through the parliament this week. As members would be aware, the Senate has Senate estimates on Thursday; therefore, the only way of us being able to deal with these different pieces of legislation is to deal with them in the House today, and this motion is to give effect to that. I move: That the question be now put. The SPEAKER 53517 The question is that the question be put.  

The House divided. [12:27]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

 87 AYES Albanese, A. N. Aly, A. Ananda-Rajah, M. Andrews, K. L. Belyea, J. A. Bowen, C. E. Buchholz, S. 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. Fernando, C. Fletcher, P. W. Freelander, M. R. Garland, C. M. L. Georganas, S. Giles, A. J. Goodenough, I. R. Gorman, P. Gosling, L. J. Hastie, A. W. 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. Ley, S. P. Lim, S. B. C. Marles, R. D. Mascarenhas, Z. F. A. McBain, K. L. McBride, E. M. Miller-Frost, L. J. Mitchell, B. K. Mitchell, R. G. Mulino, D. Neumann, S. K. O'Connor, B. P. J. O'Neil, C. E. Payne, A. E. Perrett, G. D. Phillips, F. E. Pike, H. J. 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. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Sukkar, M. S. Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Vamvakinou, M. van Manen, A. J. Wallace, A. B. Watts, T. G. Webster, A. E. Wells, A. S. Wilson, J. H. Zappia, A. 13 NOES Bandt, A. P. Bates, S. J. (Teller) Chandler-Mather, M. (Teller) Chaney, K. E. Daniel, Z. Haines, H. M. Ryan, M. M. Scamps, S. A. Spender, A. M. Steggall, Z. Tink, K. J. Watson-Brown, E. Wilkie, A. D. 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

12:30 The SPEAKER 53517 The question before the House is that the motion be agreed to.  

The House divided. [12:30]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

 87 AYES Albanese, A. N. Aly, A. Ananda-Rajah, M. Andrews, K. L. Belyea, J. A. Bowen, C. E. Buchholz, S. 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. Fernando, C. Fletcher, P. W. Freelander, M. R. Garland, C. M. L. Georganas, S. Giles, A. J. Goodenough, I. R. Gorman, P. Gosling, L. J. Hastie, A. W. 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. Ley, S. P. Lim, S. B. C. Marles, R. D. Mascarenhas, Z. F. A. McBain, K. L. McBride, E. M. Miller-Frost, L. J. Mitchell, B. K. Mitchell, R. G. Mulino, D. Neumann, S. K. O'Connor, B. P. J. O'Neil, C. E. Payne, A. E. Perrett, G. D. Phillips, F. E. Pike, H. J. 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. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Sukkar, M. S. Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Vamvakinou, M. van Manen, A. J. Wallace, A. B. Watts, T. G. Webster, A. E. Wells, A. S. Wilson, J. H. Zappia, A. 13 NOES Bandt, A. P. Bates, S. J. (Teller) Chandler-Mather, M. Chaney, K. E. Daniel, Z. Haines, H. M. Ryan, M. M. Scamps, S. A. Sharkie, R. C. C. Steggall, Z. Tink, K. J. Watson-Brown, E. (Teller) Wilkie, A. D. 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

Rearrangement 6 12:31 Mrs ELLIOT DZW Richmond I move: That notice No. 1, government business, be postponed until a later hour this day. Question agreed to. BILLS 6 BILLS Transport Security Amendment (Security of Australia's Transport Sector) Bill 2024 6

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

Second Reading 6 12:32 Mr HASTIE 260805 Canning The coalition rises to support this bill and the government amendments. The Transport Security Amendment (Security of Australia's Transport Sector) Bill 2024 seeks to strengthen Australia's transport security framework, to ensure government and industry can manage current and emerging risks in a rapidly evolving threat environment. The debate of this bill is timely. Australia was shocked earlier this month when a teenager was detained after he breached security at Avalon Airport and boarded a flight armed with a shotgun. It is to the great credit of the quick-thinking passengers and crew that no-one was injured in this incident. But it was also a sobering reminder that we cannot take our security for granted. This bill makes a number of amendments to the Aviation Transport Security Act and the Maritime Transport and Offshore Facilities Security Act 2003 to better protect aviation and maritime transport against unlawful interference. This is all about securing the industry and keeping Australians safe. It does this by amending the definition of 'unlawful interference' to capture a broader variety of acts, including cybersecurity incidents, and introduces mandatory cybersecurity incident reporting. It introduces an all-hazards security framework that will require entities to proactively identify and mitigate risks to physical security, personal security, cybersecurity and supply chain resilience to natural hazards, enhancing testing and compliance measures, strengthening enforcement tools, clarifying port security definitions to ensure relevant infrastructure and operations are covered under the regulations and simplifying regulations for vessels, allowing exemptions for vessels that infrequently travel overseas. We have a strong legacy in this area. In September 2021, the former coalition government commissioned an independent review into Australia's aviation and maritime transport security settings, led by Ms Kerri Hartland. This review considered Australia's aviation and maritime security settings and made recommendations which sought to ensure Australia's security settings remained fit for purpose and supported Australia's economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. This bill will amend the relevant acts, to give effect to the elements of the independent review which go to updating legislative and policy frameworks. This bill comes after the former coalition government also introduced the Transport Security Amendment (Critical Infrastructure) Bill 2022, which sought to address some of the elements canvassed in the current bill. However, that bill lapsed with the dissolution of the previous parliament. This went through the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security. I note that industry stakeholders raised concerns through the committee inquiry into the bill, particularly regarding the regulatory burden and disproportionate impost on regional airports. The PJCIS report recommended the regulations arising from the bill provide greater clarity to industry on the reforms, which should be done as part of a genuine, good-faith consultation with industry. I welcome the commitment we have received from the government that there will be a consultation period of 12 months for the regulations associated with this legislation, followed by a 24-month transition period to implement the reforms. We also welcome the additional clarity provided regarding the tiered all-hazards security obligations. That means that smaller airports will not have certain compliance obligations as they relate to cybersecurity, natural hazards and supply chains. Industry also raised concerns about duplicated reporting requirements, and I welcome the government's assurance that cyber-incident reports will only need to be made once, through the single reporting portal, to avoid duplication. The PJCIS also recommended that the Department of Home Affairs is adequately resourced to fulfil all of its responsibilities as a regulator. We are concerned that the department has not received additional resourcing, given that its responsibilities will expand with the passage of this bill. So the coalition reiterates the PJCIS's call for government to ensure that the Cyber and Infrastructure Security Centre is well equipped to make sure they can do their job and protect Australians and the Australian transport and maritime industry. Finally, we welcome the amendments that government is moving to address key recommendations of the PJCIS report which go to the creation of a scalable penalty regime and inserting an additional safeguard to the security directions power by requiring the secretary to notify the minister as soon as practicable after a security direction is issued. It's clear there are a number of growing threats to Australia's transport sector, including, probably foremost, the risk of cyber incidents. The incident at Avalon also underscores that we still have serious risks posed by individuals, like that person who tried to get a shotgun on the aircraft, and we need to make sure that the legislative framework is fit for purpose to allow the government and industry to address these risks. We've seen this at Heathrow Airport in London, where an electrical substation caught fire, disrupting a lot of flights; passengers were stranded, and take-offs and landings were cancelled, disrupting travel plans for hundreds of thousands of people. It's just a reminder of how government has a really important role in securing and protecting our critical infrastructure as a public good and how our airports, particularly, are vulnerable to external hazards. This is why we need this bill, this is why the coalition supports this bill and this is why the coalition will always act in the national interest and take the necessary action to keep Australians safe. So we will be supporting this bill, and I commend it to the House. 12:38 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina The coalition will always put national security at the forefront, because keeping Australians safe is the No. 1 priority; it has to be. This bill, the Transport Security Amendment (Security of Australia's Transport Sector) Bill 2024, is important. I appreciate the shadow defence minister's sensible and practical words around what this bill entails, the coalition's position on it and what needs to be done to safeguard our future. As the member for Canning, the shadow minister, has just quite correctly pointed out, regional airports sometimes have differing regulations as far as security measures are concerned, and there are some airports in country Australia whereby different airlines, because of the size of their planes and the number of seats on those planes, have different security measures. In some airports, you can board a plane without having to go through the necessary X-ray checks, whereas, for the next flight 10 minutes later on a different airline, you'll have to go through the full process, which requires passengers and all their carry-on luggage to be subjected to X-rays to ensure that they aren't carrying any sharp items or items that would otherwise be, and should be, prevented. We need to make sure that those towns and cities are not affected. For some of them, having different, competitive airlines with different security screenings means that they have competitive prices and that those towns and regions those airports serve can access health and business and tourism avenues that they would otherwise not be able to. This is important. I'm very pleased that the shadow defence minister has raised that point, because it's a good one. He also talked about consultation and the necessity for stakeholders to be fully engaged in this process. Again, I commend the shadow minister for his commonsense approach, as in everything he does. He has certainly made the point that there needs to be good consultation in this process—in this case, 12 months of consultation—and then there are 24 months for transition to reform, as he quite correctly pointed out. These are important factors in this particular legislation. The coalition is supporting the bill. It is supporting the government amendments. What the bill proposes to do is strengthen Australia's transport security framework to ensure government and industry can manage current and emerging risks in a rapidly evolving threat environment. No-one would know better how volatile our nation is than the shadow defence minister and, dare I say, those members who sit on the National Security Committee. It is a worrying situation. We do live in troubled times. These are troubled times both abroad and, certainly, in a volatile Australia—nothing our agents cannot handle. I have always been impressed by the top-level public servants, security officials and intelligence agents who serve our nation irrespective of who's in government. They do a fine job, and we should honour and recognise the role that they play to keep Australians safe. That also goes to the Australian Federal Police and our various state police forces. They are there to serve the public, and they do an outstanding job. I want to acknowledge that. But what we saw recently on 6 March at Avalon Airport was disturbing. There is no question about that. A teenager allegedly boarded a Jetstar plane armed with a long-arm firearm and ammunition and claimed, 'I've got bombs in my bag.' That's what the court documents have revealed. This is worrying. You're always going to get people who are sad enough and mad enough and bad enough to do the wrong thing. That's the way of the world, unfortunately, and that's why legislation such as this is important. That's why, as I said in my very first sentence in this debate, national security has to be the first order of priority of government. It has to be. This bill makes a number of amendments to the Aviation Transport Security Act of 2004 as well as the Maritime Transport and Offshore Facilities Security Act 2003. I've spoken about airports. It's not just about airports. It's very much about, and should be about, shipping ports. The number of illegal cigarettes being imported into this country at the moment is out of control, and what we know about what illegal tobacco is doing to our nation and the damage and harm it is causing is probably just the tip of the iceberg. I'm told that many cigarette shops that are very much legal cannot gain insurance in Melbourne for fear of the firebombings, the molotov cocktails that are being hurled into them, and the bullying and harassment done by illegal bikie gangs. This is their new level of moneymaking means. This is what the bikie gangs are doing. They are scum. I'll look straight down the camera and say it: bikie gangs are scum. We know that, and we need to do everything that we can to eliminate their trade, because shopkeepers and legal sellers of tobacco, who are trying to do the right thing, are having their profits undercut by these mongrels. There's probably no other word for them apart from the one I used before. They'll go on their little Christmas toymaking jaunts and pretend as though they are good for society. What they are doing is out of control, and you get honest, legal shopkeepers being bullied, harassed and threatened with baseball bats and all the rest. Having their shops and their business models ruined is just terrible. This bill, through its regulations and legislation, amends the definition of 'unlawful interference' and, in doing so, captures a broader variety of acts, including cybersecurity incidents. It introduces mandatory cybersecurity incident reporting, and that's always important too. If people do see something that they think is odd or not quite right, there are hotlines to ring anonymously. Do it for the sake of your nation. Do it for the sake of other people. It introduces an all-hazards security framework which will require entities to proactively identify and mitigate risks to physical security, personnel security, cybersecurity, supply chain resilience and natural hazards; enhances testing and compliance measures; and bolsters enforcement tools, including by enlarging the secretary's power to issue security directions and extending the demerit point system to the air cargo sector. The secretary does need to have his or her powers extended in this regard, which is so important. It clarifies port security definitions to ensure relevant infrastructure and operations are covered under regulations. Of course, we know how important biosecurity is at ports, and making sure that we have the right security in the right places as the shipping containers come in and as the ships come in is of critical importance. We can't go through and test, examine and put sniffer dogs in every single shipping container, but what we can certainly do is make sure that we have the right number of people in place with the right training and the right framework to ensure that we can do the right thing by Australia's security. It simplifies regulations for vessels, allowing exemptions for vessels that infrequently travel overseas. That's also so important because we need to have compliance in this nation that makes Australia easier to do business with and that makes Australian businesses which are doing the right thing always able to continue to do that without having to fill out paperwork after paperwork simply to keep a bureaucrat in a job. As the shadow minister indicated earlier, in September 2021 the former coalition government commissioned an independent review into Australia's aviation and maritime transport security settings, and it was a good move by a good government. It was led by Ms Kerri Hartland. This review looked at, as a whole, Australia's aviation and maritime security settings and made certain recommendations which sought to ensure that Australia's security settings continued to be fit for purpose and supported Australia's economic recovery from the COVID-19 global pandemic. We've heard ad nauseam in this place, 'What did we get from all the spending that we did during the COVID-19 pandemic?' We saved lives and kept the doors of business open. With the spending, we kept people in jobs and safe from harm. As Deputy Prime Minister at the time, I was very proud of what former prime minister Scott Morrison did while leading this nation. The Johns Hopkins institute—the American centre—recognised and acknowledged Australia's pandemic response as second best in the world, and we should be very proud of that, instead of knocking and mocking our response by way of the money that we spent to keep people alive, to keep people safe and to keep them in work. What we should be doing is applauding that effort and those decisions taken because, at the time, there was no manual you could have pulled off the shelf and said, 'This is how you react when you have a worldwide global pandemic.' According to the Johns Hopkins centre, our response was the second best in the world. This bill comes after the former coalition government introduced the Transport Security Amendment (Critical Infrastructure) Bill 2022. That bill sought to address some of the elements canvassed in the current bill; however, the 2022 bill lapsed when parliament was dissolved. This parliament is also about to be dissolved, and many people are thankful for that because they can't wait to get into the ballot box and cast their vote and hopefully get Australia back on track by voting for the coalition. It is the only way to do that. If you vote for a teal, you vote for more of the same. If you vote for an Independent, you vote for more of the same. If you vote for a Green, you vote for more of the same, for what you have copped in the past three years, and Australians have had enough. Industry stakeholders raised a number of concerns through the PJCIS inquiry into the bill, particularly regarding the regulatory burden and the disproportionate impost on regional airports. I mentioned this before, as did the shadow minister for defence. We do not need a disproportionate impost on regional airports. This absolutely needs to be considered and taken into every account when the government of the day, in the next term, is looking at this, whether that is a Labor government or whether that is a coalition government. I won't even frighten people with the prospect of what else we could have for the 48th Parliament, but, I say again, regional aviation at the moment is on its knees, is being crippled with the situation around Rex. I am pleased about and I've acknowledged what the government has done to keep Rex in the air—it is too vital not to—but we are going to need a long-term solution for that very serious situation. We are going to need to ensure that those towns and cities which have only Rex flying into them—Parkes, Narrandera and Ceduna, for example—continue to have aviation support for those towns. My own home town, Wagga Wagga, has QantasLink and Rex. We need competition, so we need to keep Rex in the air because Rex in the air means jobs on the ground. For Wagga Wagga, that is $12 million of wages and 180 people at the maintenance hangar at Forest Hill airport. It is too vital to lose. We cannot afford to do that, and I would like to see the government of the future do whatever it can to keep Rex flying. The coalition supports this bill, which recognises the importance in the framework of national security, and the amendments as well. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Consideration in Detail 9 12:53 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith I present the supplementary explanatory memorandum of the bill, and I ask leave of the House to move government amendments (1) to (9) together. Leave is granted. Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 I move government amendments (1) to (9) as circulated together: SHEET AP102 (1) Schedule 1, item 5, page 8 (line 20), omit the penalty, substitute: Penalty: 300 penalty units. (2) Schedule 1, item 5, page 9 (line 1), omit the penalty, substitute: Penalty: 300 penalty units. (3) Schedule 1, item 7, page 9 (line 28), omit the penalty, substitute: Penalty: 300 penalty units. (4) Schedule 1, item 7, page 10 (line 9), omit the penalty, substitute: Penalty: 300 penalty units. (5) Schedule 1, item 28, page 20 (after line 11), at the end of subsection 171(5), add: Penalty: 200 penalty units. (6) Schedule 1, item 59, page 35 (lines 17 and 18), omit "200 penalty units", substitute "300 penalty units". (7) Schedule 3, page 85 (after line 8), after item 25, insert: 25A After section 69 Insert: 69A Notification of special security directions (1) The Secretary must, as soon as reasonably practicable after giving a special security direction, notify the Minister, in writing, of: (a) the giving of the direction; and (b) the terms of the direction. (2) Failure to comply with this section does not affect the validity of the direction. (8) Schedule 3, page 86 (after line 11), after item 29, insert: 29A Before section 37 Insert: 36B Notification of security directions (1) The Secretary must, as soon as reasonably practicable after giving a security direction, notify the Minister, in writing, of: (a) the giving of the direction; and (b) the terms of the direction. (2) Failure to comply with this section does not affect the validity of the direction. (9) Schedule 3, page 90 (after line 30), at the end of the Schedule, add: Part 7 — Increased penalties Aviation Transport Security Act 2004 39 Subsections 13(1) and 14(1) (penalty) Omit "200 penalty units", substitute "300 penalty units". 40 Paragraphs 35(3)(a), 36(3)(a), 36A(3)(a), 37(3)(a), 38(3)(a) and 38A(3)(a) Repeal the paragraphs, substitute: (a) for an offence committed by an airport operator, an aircraft operator or a screening authority—250 penalty units; or 41 Paragraph 38AB(3)(a) Omit "200 penalty units", substitute "250 penalty units". 42 Subsection 38B(1) Omit "50 penalty units", substitute "250 penalty units". 43 At the end of subsection 38B(1) Add: Note: If a body corporate is convicted of an offence against regulations made for the purposes of this section, subsection 4B(3) of the Crimes Act 1914 allows a court to impose fines of up to 5 times the penalty stated in this subsection. 44 Paragraph 44(4)(a) Repeal the paragraph, substitute: (a) for an offence committed by an airport operator, an aircraft operator or a screening authority—250 penalty units; or 45 Paragraphs 44C(4)(a), 52(3)(a), 60(3)(a), 62(2)(a) and 65(3)(a) Omit "200 penalty units", substitute "250 penalty units". 46 Subsections 65C(1), 73(1) and 74C(1) (penalty) Omit "200 penalty units", substitute "300 penalty units". 47 Subsection 74K(3) Omit "50 penalty units", substitute "250 penalty units". 48 At the end of section 74K Add: Note: If a body corporate is convicted of an offence against regulations made for the purposes of this section, subsection 4B(3) of the Crimes Act 1914 allows a court to impose fines of up to 5 times the penalty stated in this subsection. 49 Subsections 100(1) and 101(1) (penalty) Omit "200 penalty units", substitute "300 penalty units". 50 Paragraph 133(2)(b) Omit "50 penalty units", substitute "250 penalty units". 51 At the end of subsection 133(2) Add: Note: If a body corporate is convicted of an offence against regulations made under this section, subsection 4B(3) of the Crimes Act 1914 allows a court to impose fines of up to 5 times the penalty stated in paragraph (b). 52 Subsection 133(3) Omit "50 penalty units", substitute "250 penalty units". 53 Transitional provision The amendments of sections 35, 36, 36A, 37, 38, 38A, 38AB, 38B, 44, 44C, 52, 60, 62, 65, 74K and 133 of the Aviation Transport Security Act 2004 made by this this Part do not affect the validity of regulations in force for the purposes of those provisions immediately before the commencement of this item. The amendments that the government is moving come about as a result of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security inquiry into this bill. These amendments pick up six of the recommendations made by that committee following that inquiry. The amendments increased penalties for offences across the transport security legislation, specifically for airport operators and aircraft operators. They also increase penalty offences across the legislation as it expressly applies to screening authorities. The amendments also amend the regulation-making powers in the Aviation Transport Security Act to expressly allow regulations to prescribe offences and penalties for airport and aircraft operators and increase those maximum penalties. They also amend the general regulation-making powers in relation to sections 38B, 74K and 133 of the Aviation Transport Security Act to increase the maximum penalty that may be prescribed for offences under those provisions from 50 penalty units to 250 penalty units. Finally, they introduce a requirement for the secretary to notify the Minister for Home Affairs after issuing a special security direction under the Aviation Transport Security Act and the Maritime Transport Security Act as well. This will enhance the existing safeguards and provide an accountability measure for the secretary. Question agreed to. Bill, as amended, agreed to. Third Reading 11 12:56 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith by leave—I move: That this bill now be read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Supply Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026 11

Supply Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026

First Reading 11 Second Reading 11 12:57 Mr JONES A9B Whitlam I move: That this bill be now read a second time. This bill, Supply Bill (No. 1), along with Supply Bill (No. 2) and Parliamentary Departments Supply Bill (No. 1), proposes appropriations to facilitate the ongoing business of government from 1 July this year. The supply bills would provide most government entities with approximately five-twelfths—that is, five months of their 2025-26 appropriation estimates—to ensure the continuity of government programs and the Commonwealth's ability to meet its obligations during the first five months of financial year 2025-26. The 2025-26 estimates are, broadly, the 2024-25 base adjusted for economic and program-specific parameters and other estimate variations. They reflect the effect of decisions announced as part of the 2024-25 Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook or those included in the additional estimates appropriation acts for 2024-25. Following convention, the supply bills do not generally include 2025-26 budget measures. The supply bills propose appropriations greater than five-twelfths of the 2025-26 estimates for entities which have uneven expenditure early in the financial year—for example, grant payments to non-government organisations that need to be made upfront. Greater appropriation allocations are also provided to ensure adequate cash flow and continuity of operations for some smaller entities such as the Australian Digital Health Agency and the Office of the Special Investigator. Finally, funding for more than five-twelfths of annual estimates is being provided to entities which may need to respond flexibly to service delivery requirements such as the National Emergency Management Agency, the Department of Home Affairs, the Department of Social Services and Services Australia. Supply Bill (No. 1) seeks appropriations of $86.1 billion from the Consolidated Revenue Fund to fund the ordinary services of government on an interim basis until the 2025-26 budget appropriation bills have passed the parliament. This arrangement allows for the Appropriation Bill (No. 1) for 2025-26 to be passed by the next parliament, if necessary. The bill contains an advance to the finance minister (AFM) provision of $400 million to provide the government with capacity to allocate additional funding for urgent and unforeseen expenditure. This provision is equivalent to that in 2024-25. The strong accountability and transparency arrangements that have been in place since 2019-20 will continue in 2025-26, including a media release by the finance minister in weeks when the AFMs are issued and an annual report on the AFM allocations tabled in parliament. This report includes an assurance review undertaken by the Australian National Audit Office. Details of the proposed expenditure are set out in the schedule to the bill, the explanatory memorandum and the tabled 2025-26 portfolio budget statements. This bill, along with Supply Bill (No. 2) and Supply (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1), must be passed during this sitting week to ensure funding is available from 1 July this year so that essential public services and the core functions of government continue to operate in the context of an election. On this basis, I commend this bill to the House. The DEPUTY SPEAKER E0D In accordance with the resolution agreed to earlier, the debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for a later hour. Supply Bill (No. 2) 2025-2026 12

Supply Bill (No. 2) 2025-2026

First Reading 12 Second Reading 12 13:02 Mr JONES A9B Whitlam I move: That this bill be now read a second time. This bill is part of the supply bills package proposing appropriations to facilitate the ongoing business of government from 1 July 2025. Similar to the previous supply bill, this bill would provide most government entities approximately five-twelfths of their 2025-26 appropriation estimates to ensure the continuity of government programs and Commonwealth's ability to meet its obligations during the first five months of financial year 2025-26. The appropriations proposed in this bill are broadly based on five-twelfths of the 2024-25 estimates, adjusted for economic and program-specific parameters and other estimate variations. Where necessary, appropriation allocations are higher for entities which have uneven expenditure early in the financial year or may need to be able to respond flexibly to service delivery requirements. Supply Bill (No. 2) seeks appropriations of $10.9 billion from the Consolidated Revenue Fund to fund services that are not the ordinary services of government, such as capital works, equity injections and payments to states, territories and local governments. Supply bill funding is provided on an interim basis until the 2025-26 budget appropriation bills have passed. This bill contains an advance to the finance minister (AFM) provision of $600 million to provide the government with capacity to allocate additional funding for urgent and unforeseen expenditure. This provision is equivalent to the last financial year. The bill also contains debit limits for 2025-26 for general purpose financial assistance and national partnership payments that may be made under the Federal Financial Relations Act. These debit limits are included for the full year so that agreements with other governments can be established with certainty and are unchanged from 2024-25. Details of the proposed expenditures are set out in the schedule to the bill, the explanatory memorandum and the tabled 2025-26 portfolio budget statements. I commend the bill to the chamber. The DEPUTY SPEAKER E0D In accordance with the resolution agreed to earlier, the debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate is made an order of the day for a later hour. Supply (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026 13

Supply (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026

First Reading 13 Second Reading 13 13:05 Mr JONES A9B Whitlam I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Supply (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) provides appropriations for the first five months of financial year 2025-26 for the operations of the Department of the Senate, the Department of the House of Representatives, the Department of Parliamentary Services and the Parliamentary Budget Office. The bill seeks approval for appropriations from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of $139.5 million. The appropriations proposed in this bill represent approximately five-twelfths of the 2025-26 appropriation estimates for parliamentary departments, which are broadly in line with the 2024-25 base adjusted for economic and program-specific parameters and other estimate variations. As with other supply bills, I wish to emphasise that the bill only seeks appropriate funding on an interim basis until the budget appropriation bills have been passed. Therefore, no new measures for the 2025-26 budget are included in this bill. The bill also includes an advance to the responsible Presiding Officer of $1.9 million, unchanged from the 2024-25 arrangements. Full details of the proposed expenditure are set out in the schedule of the bill, the explanatory memorandum and the tabled 2025-26 portfolio budget statements. I commend the bill to the chamber. The DEPUTY SPEAKER E0D In accordance with the resolution agreed to earlier, the debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate is made an order of the day for a later hour. Parliamentary Business Resources Legislation Amendment (Machinery of Government Change) Bill 2025 13

Parliamentary Business Resources Legislation Amendment (Machinery of Government Change) Bill 2025

First Reading 13 Second Reading 13 13:07 Mr GORMAN 74519 Perth I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Today the government introduces the Parliamentary Business Resources Legislation Amendment (Machinery of Government Change) Bill 2025. The bill will delay the transfer of the administration of certain parliamentary resources from the Department of Finance to the Independent Parliamentary Expenses Authority (IPEA) by 12 months, from 1 July 2025 to 1 July 2026. The bill will amend the Parliamentary Business Resources Legislation Amendment (Review Implementation and Other Measures) Act 2024. Extending the current framework for the administration and provision of parliamentary resources beyond this financial year will minimise the degree of change and disruption following the 2025 election, where there will be heightened activity and need for advice and support to both ceasing and commencing parliamentarians and their staff. It will also allow time for the government's substantial Commonwealth parliamentary workplace reforms to mature. This includes the establishment of the statutory Parliamentary Workplace Support Service (PWSS), the Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission (IPSC) and legislative amendments to the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984. A transfer date of 1 July 2026 will still allow sufficient time for IPEA to settle its administration of the transferred resources prior to the next independent statutory review of the Parliamentary Business Resources Act 2017, scheduled to occur in late 2027. IPEA will retain its current functions relating to the provision of travel resources to current and former senators and members under the PBR Act and other legislation. This includes the administration of those resources, including processing claims, paying or providing resources, and providing personal and general advice. IPEA's transparency and accountability functions include reporting and auditing resources and giving rulings relating to the public resources IPEA administers under the PBR Act. Parliamentarians and their staff have access to a range of resources, which are provided by multiple entities including the parliamentary departments and portfolio departments, as well as the Department of Finance and IPEA, under the PBR Act and other mechanisms. I commend this bill. The DEPUTY SPEAKER E0D In accordance with the resolution agreed to earlier, the debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for a later hour. Mr Bandt M3C Point of order. The DEPUTY SPEAKER E0D The minister was on her feet first. Mr Bandt M3C I've sought a point of order twice. The DEPUTY SPEAKER E0D After the minister has finished I will give you the call. Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Reconsiderations) Bill 2025 14

Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Reconsiderations) Bill 2025

First Reading 14 Second Reading 14 13:10 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney I move: That this bill be now read a second time. I'd like to add that Labor is committed to fixing our environment laws so that they work better for our environment and better for business. This means that our laws need to improve nature, and protect our unique native plants and animals. And our laws need to be less bureaucratic and provide more certainty for business. That's what the community expects and that's what we're delivering. We'll do this in a commonsense way that supports both national productivity and environmental protection. Everybody agrees that the current laws don't work. We said that we would improve certainty for business—certainty that helps drive investment in jobs, in communities and in nation-building projects. That's what we're doing. We've also said that we want a country in which nature is being repaired and is regenerating rather than continuing to decline. And that's what we are doing. This bill would address a critical problem in our current laws—a problem that's playing out right now in a small community in Tasmania that is supported by a well-established industry; a problem that is putting jobs, investment and individual livelihoods at risk. This bill would support the government's commitment to provide certainty, clarity and fairness for ongoing industries, workers and communities affected by reconsideration of decisions under the EPBC Act. The bill would remove the ability of the minister for the environment to reconsider a past decision on an action that meets certain very specific criteria. Reconsideration powers have been available to the minister since the beginning of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act a quarter of a century ago. These powers exist to enable the minister to respond to a limited range of circumstances, based on new and changing environmental information. It's important that the minister be able to do this. But these powers can also create considerable uncertainty and affect communities that have come to depend on a lifeline industry. The economic and social impacts of changing a decision can be severe, putting jobs, community and individual livelihoods at risk—industries and communities like Macquarie Harbour. This is a timely example, but it's potentially not an isolated event. This means that swift action is required now, but also to ensure that these circumstances do not occur again. The bill recognises that an established and lawfully operating project, where proponents did the right thing and referred their action to the environment minister, and which have been investing and operating for five or more years on the basis of that decision, should not be put at risk. The bill would only capture a very small subset of decisions that can be reconsidered, and they are in that category 'not controlled action if undertaken in a particular manner', or NCA-PM decisions. These decisions are made when the minister decides that an action does not require approval, because the action would be undertaken in the particular manner described. The bill would also recognise the important role that states and territories play in managing environmental impacts, through their own plans, policies and laws. The amendment specifies that a project must have a state or territory management arrangement specified in its 'particular manners' to meet the criteria. The Australian government is committed to working in partnership with industry, communities and states and territories to protect our environment and support the conservation and recovery of our threatened species. We have invested more than half a billion dollars in targeted threatened species recovery, including under the Saving Native Species Program, the Natural Heritage Trust and the National Environmental Science Program. This is complemented by other government investments for Ramsar wetlands, World Heritage properties and protected areas that support biodiversity conservation and the recovery of threatened species. We have invested $37.5 million in priority conservation actions for the Maugean skate population in Macquarie Harbour—investments to improve water quality and environmental conditions within Macquarie Harbour and support critical species conservation actions including a successful captive breeding program. We are also actively working with salmon industry stakeholders on further steps that can be taken to better protect the environment and ensure the industry has a sustainable and long-term future producing high-quality salmon. This bill strikes a balance between the important task of protecting our environment, and the need to provide certainty and stability to businesses which have already made substantial investment to get a project up and running, and most importantly protecting jobs. This is good, sensible and balanced regulation. The proposed changes would commence the day after royal assent and would apply to any reconsideration decision made under section 78 after the amendment commences, regardless of how long ago the original decision was made. This is in accord with the very long list of achievements that this government has made in better protecting the environment. So far, we have protected an extra 100 million hectares of Australian ocean and bush, an area the size of Germany, Italy and Norway combined, and in the budget tonight we'll also be committing an additional $250 million to protect an additional area of Australia's landmass around the size of New Zealand, which would take us to 30 per cent of Australia's landmass protected by 2030, a commitment that we were pleased to make in Montreal at the global biodiversity conference. We've quadrupled the size of Heard Island and McDonald Islands Marine Reserve. That was the biggest act of ocean conservation anywhere in the world in 2024. We've tripled the size of Macquarie Island Marine Park. That was the biggest act of environmental conservation anywhere in the world in 2023. We've doubled funding to better look after our national parks, including Kakadu and Uluru. We are progressing World Heritage listing for more of Australia's most special places, including places like Cape York, the Flinders Ranges, and Murujuga in Western Australia, which is the site of 50,000-year-old rock art. We've stopped Jabiluka from being mined for uranium and we're looking forward to adding it to Kakadu National Park instead. We've saved Toondah Harbour in Queensland from destruction, including the protection of internationally important wetlands which provide an important stop for migratory bird species. We're investing $1.3 billion to support the successful Indigenous Rangers Program, including doubling the number of Indigenous rangers, who are doing an absolutely magnificent job of managing feral animals, getting rid of weeds and managing fire risks, particularly in Indigenous protected areas, and we've expanded those Indigenous protected areas with a $230 million investment. We're establishing 12 new Indigenous protected areas that will cover an area larger than Tasmania. The important thing about these new IPAs is they're not all central desert; they're in all sorts of landscapes including very biodiverse regions on the North Coast of New South Wales, which are underrepresented in our national reserve system. We're investing more than half a billion dollars to better protect threatened plants and animals and tackle the feral animals and weeds that are killing our native species, including doing phenomenally innovative work like using the Felixer cat traps and also using drone technology and satellite technology to identify weed outbreaks, to go out into the landscape and literally manage species like feral cats in the landscape automatically, without human presence, so that we can place these cat traps and so on right through the landscape and protect much larger areas from the threats of feral animals and weeds. We're investing $200 million to clean up our rivers and catchments in our urban areas to transform concrete drains into renaturalised streams and creek beds where threatened species that exist in our urban environment can re-establish and move through the landscape. Indeed, the manager of government business has one of these projects in his electorate that I was very pleased to visit last year. We have already increased recycling capacity in this country by 1.3 million tonnes every year. An enormous amount of rubbish that would otherwise be going into landfill is instead being recovered for productive uses. We're stopping paper, glass, metal and also those soft and difficult-to-recycle plastics going into landfill. Instead we are investing to recover those materials and to extract the value out of them, to remake products in Australia. We're establishing the world's first nature repair market to make it easier to invest in nature restoration. I was very pleased recently to see the extensive public discussion about the first proposed methodology under that nature repair market which would, again, give us wonderful opportunities to see not just government investment but also philanthropic and business investment in nature restoration. We've passed strong laws to protect the ozone layer. We've also delivered Australia's first national environmental chemicals standards, banning or ensuring the safety of 900 industrial chemicals so far, with more added every year. That includes those forever chemicals that have been particularly problematic in the Australian landscape. We know how troubling PFAS, PFOA and other chemical types leaching into our environment has been, particularly around former Defence sites and also around our airports. Making sure that we have proper controls on these forever chemicals will be very important for future generations of Australians. We boosted the first tranche of our environmental laws with a strong water trigger to make sure that the impacts of coal and gas projects on water are considered. As I mentioned earlier, the second tranche of our environmental laws passed this place at the end of the first half of last year, in July last year. That included the establishment of Australia's first environment protection agency with strong new powers and penalties, taking maximum penalties under environment law from around $15 million to $780 million. That second tranche of environmental law included much stronger data and transparency as well, taking state-of-the-environment reporting from every five years to every three years, having a constant set of upgraded data available for people to track how the Australian environment was going and, of course, making sure that independent and world-first definition of 'nature positive' was included in legislation as well. We also have passed strong laws to force big polluters to cut their emissions, because we know that Australia can get to net zero carbon pollution by 2050, and we know that that is critical for our natural environment. We know that climate change is a significant risk to our natural environment and that getting to net zero is a critical part of reducing that risk. This is Australia doing its share when it comes to the global effort—or what should be a global effort—to reduce carbon emissions. Since coming to government, and since I have been the environment minister, I've approved more than 80 renewable energy projects. Those 80 renewable energy projects have taken us to an unprecedented amount of renewable energy in our national grid. The last figures we saw, from the end of last year, had renewable energy at 46 per cent of the grid. Since coming to government, we've added 15 gigawatts of renewable energy to the grid. Now, 15 gigawatts of renewable energy is more renewable energy than the Leader of the Opposition's nuclear reactors would ever produce under the plan that he's announced to the Australian people. And that renewable energy is already done. That's not something that will happen in 25 years time, after we spend $600 billion of taxpayers' money. That's done now. We've approved more than 80 renewable energy projects, which are enough to power 10.4 million Australian homes. There are only 10.8 million households in Australia. We've approved almost enough renewable energy to power every single household in Australia. This is a transition that's real. It's happening right now; we're in the middle of it. The thousands of jobs that are working on that renewable transition are real; they're happening right now. People are doing that work in communities, including regional communities, right around Australia. I'm pleased to present this Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Reconsiderations) Bill 2025 to the House, and I commend its passage. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 In accordance with the resolution agreed to earlier, the debate is adjourned, and the resumption of debate is made an order of the day for a later hour this day. STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS 17 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Bonner Electorate: Cricket 17 13:29 Mr VASTA E0D Bonner Anyone who knows me knows that I love cricket. Beyond the 13 bats in my electorate office and memories of playing with my brothers, cricket is part of our national identity. Now, I want to light up the future of cricket in Bonner. If a coalition government is elected this year, we'll deliver $1 million for a lighting upgrade at the Wynnum Manly District Cricket Club. I recently met with President Graham Mapri and Queensland Cricket CEO Terry Svenson who told me the current lighting at Bill Albury Oval is not up to standard. This is the infrastructure that we need to support growing junior, female, veteran and multicultural competitions. It will also help Queensland Cricket and Cricket Australia by creating a high-quality venue for high-performance matches and community events, especially in the lead-up to the 2032 Olympics. Better lighting means safer training conditions and more opportunities for players of all ages. Sports build stronger communities, and this is an investment in our future. I'm proud to support local clubs like Wynnum Manly District Cricket Club and be part of a team that backs grassroots sport. Bartolo, Mr George, OAM 17 13:31 Ms BYRNES 299145 Cunningham Today, I would like to acknowledge a truly remarkable man, George Bartolo OAM, who passed away peacefully at home surrounded by his loving family on 11 March 2025. He is survived by daughters Janet and Karen and is now reunited with his late wife, Lourdes (Doris) Bartolo. George had many passions, and the ones that stand out the most are his love for family, community, dogs, soccer, dancing and the Labor Party. George was always first to hit the dance floor, lighting up every event with his infectious energy, and was always the life of the party. As a life member of the Labor Party, George advocated for social justice and a better future for all in all that he did. He was a founding member of the Illawarra Ethnic Council, now the MCCI, in 1975 and played a pivotal role in fostering multiculturalism and supporting migrants and refugees in our region. He also served as senior vice-chairman of the MCCI board for two decades, and CEO Chris Lacey is here with us today. He was a committee member of the Illawarra Dog Training Club and a foundation member of the Maltese Community Council of NSW. He served as an executive member at the George Cross Falcons club and a foundation member of Cringila United soccer club and Wollongong Wolves. George's profound dedication to his community has left a lasting legacy for generations to come. Last Friday, I was joined by Chris Bowen, Ryan Park, Paul Scully, Tania Brown and so many others to say our final goodbyes at his funeral. Thank you, George. You will be dearly missed. Victoria: Bushfires 17 13:32 Mr VIOLI 300147 Casey On 15 and 16 March, the Montrose community was impacted by a devastating bushfire. Montrose CFA and other local crews were initially called at 2 pm on the Saturday to the Dr Ken Leversha Reserve. The fire quickly spread; however, the firefighters did an amazing job to get it under control. Unfortunately, at 10 pm that evening, the fire broke out again, breaking containment lines and sending embers down residential streets. Sadly, one house was lost and many were damaged. Over 200 firefighters fought the blaze long into the afternoon and the night. Firefighters came from all across our community to keep the Montrose community safe. They were supported by FRV, Forest Fire Management, SES, Victoria Police and Ambulance Victoria. I also want to thank the Montrose football club and the Kilsyth Cobras for opening up their stadiums and reserves as emergency hubs for residents. Luckily, we had a downpour on Sunday morning that helped to control the fire. Thank you and well done to captain of the Montrose CFA, Matt, and also his full team, including Liz, the communications officer who did an amazing job keeping the community updated. It was great to be with her and the team at the Montrose Community Festival on Sunday, where so many residents wanted to thank the CFA and the Montrose CFA and thank Liz for her work on telling them when there was an emergency and what to do. We're so lucky to have such amazing volunteers in our community. (Time expired) Dunkley Electorate: Roads 18 13:34 Ms BELYEA 309484 Dunkley With the suburbs of Patterson Lakes, Chelsea, Chelsea Heights and Bonbeach becoming part of the electorate of Dunkley, I have been out and about talking to locals in these communities. An issue of great concern for locals, which they've spoken to me about at the doors and on the phones, is the lack of safety at the Thompson Road and Mornington Peninsula Freeway intersection. This is for both motorists and pedestrians who live nearby and use the intersection frequently. I am very pleased to announce the federal Labor government is responding to these long-held concerns by announcing an upgrade to this major intersection. This will include installing traffic signals at the entry ramps at Thompson Road, Patterson Lakes and the Mornington Peninsula Freeway. It will improve access to the freeway by reducing vehicles using the Gladesville Boulevard roundabout to turn into the freeway. It will improve road safety and reduce the likelihood of crashes. It will improve intersection performance and reduce congestion. The $25 million investment will support locals travelling to and from the south-east and Mornington Peninsula. It is a welcomed budget decision that will ensure the safety of drivers and pedestrians using these much frequented areas. Federal Election 18 13:35 Mr CHANDLER-MATHER 300121 Griffith Right now, this country is run in the interests of billionaires and big corporations. While single parents are forced to make tough choices between feeding their kids or paying the rent, Coles and Woolworths record some of the highest profit margins in the world. While mortgage-holders and renters are up to their eyeballs in rental and mortgage stress, struggling to make that next rent or mortgage payment, the Commonwealth Bank recorded a record half-yearly $5 billion profit off the back of the misery of millions of renters and mortgage-holders. It doesn't have to be this way. It genuinely doesn't. While the people in power and the political establishment may rely on crushing your hope that things can get better, they can. This election, we have a genuine chance to change things for the better. You do not have to choose between going backwards under the Liberals or more tinkering around the edges under Labor. We have a genuine chance to elect a broad progressive minority parliament, where we keep the Liberals and Nationals out but we push Labor to take real action on the issues that matter to people's lives—taxing billionaires and big corporations, bringing dental and mental health under Medicare, starting to treat renters like they deserve to be treated rather than like second-class citizens and taking climate change seriously. If you want all of that, then you have an opportunity this election to vote one Greens and push for real, genuine, positive change. Greek Independence Day 18 13:37 Mr GEORGANAS DZY Adelaide Today, 25 March, marks Greek Independence Day, which is celebrated and commemorated throughout Australia by all our Greek community—in fact, by Greeks all over the world no matter where they are. I was honoured on the weekend to attend the wreath-laying ceremony and church service that took place in my electorate to commemorate this special event. It was attended by many state ministers, politicians, opposition members and the Australian armed forces—the Army, the Navy and the Air Force. On this day in 1821 the Greek people rose against the Ottoman Empire, fighting for their independence after four centuries of oppression. This struggle was not merely about reclaiming a nation. It was about restoring the ideals of democracy—ideals first forged in ancient Greece. The Greek revolutionaries were inspired by the enlightenment and the fundamental belief that people should govern themselves free from tyranny. These same principles continue to define the way we live here in Australia today. Our democracy, like so many around the world, owes so much to those ancient Greeks. The very concepts of citizens having a voice in their government, the rule of law and civic participation trace their origins back to Athenian democracy. Greek Australians in all our electorates here in this nation have played an integral role in shaping our nation, bringing not only their rich culture to Australia but also their deep-rooted commitment to democratic ideals. Therefore, today we say, 'Zito i Ellada'—'Long live Greece'—and long live Australia. Budget 19 13:38 Ms LE 295676 Fowler We're about to hear another budget. I could be wrong, but I sense there won't be much in it for the people of Fowler or south-west Sydney. Last year the government had a surplus—a rare opportunity to invest in our communities—but they didn't. Now with a forecast deficit, what can they promise us? More importantly, what will they actually deliver? We've heard the big announcements. There's $1 billion to buy land in Campbelltown for a train line that won't be built for decades, if ever—not in our lifetime—and Metrowest is delayed again. There are billions spent elsewhere while south-west Sydney is once again forgotten. Our community has helped settle thousands of migrants and refugees, yet we're still waiting for new train lines, proper health services and real infrastructure. Governments keep placing people in our suburbs without building the support around them. They make decisions about us, not with us, yet my community will welcome any bill relief—they're doing it tough. But, let's be honest, a rebate is not a plan; it's a sugar hit to distract from the decades of neglect. My office has handled over 7,000 cases. We've launched a mobile outreach program, including Bring Your Bill Day, because my community deserves visibility, respect and action. This election isn't about parties. It's about who listens, who shows up and who delivers. I'll keep fighting for my community in Fowler. They will not be ignored, not again. Fraser Electorate: Community Events 19 13:40 Dr MULINO 132880 Fraser Last weekend I had the pleasure of attending two festivals within my community. On Saturday I attended West Footscray Holi, which celebrated the Hindu holiday that champions the triumph of good over evil. The festival was attended by many members of the Footscray community and featured live music, food stalls and, of course, plenty of colour. As anyone who's been to a Holi festival might expect, I started the day in black and white and finished the day in pink, green, blue, yellow and red. However, the level of colour was only exceeded by the level of effort that went into planning this wonderful event. Indeed, the team behind the scenes worked hard to ensure that everyone was able to enjoy such a special day. I give special thanks to the West Footscray Traders Association as well as to the Indian consul-general for making the time to attend. On Sunday, the Yarraville Festival was held, which was a great opportunity to celebrate the community of Melbourne's inner west. This annual festival has become an institution in Melbourne and is unmissable. On top of the food stalls, the live music stage showcased the many talented artists and musicians that call Melbourne home. The event was a spectacular occasion, and I give special thanks again to the organising committee, who made it happen through countless volunteer hours, with a special shout-out to Con and Anton. Both of these events show how the community spirit in my electorate is running strong and how volunteer work can make events like these work so well for the thousands of people who attend. Fisher Electorate: Infrastructure 19 13:41 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher Nine years ago I made a pledge that I would work hard for the people of Fisher. I promised to fight for our community and to make Fisher the best place to learn, earn and retire. Every day since then I've done just that, securing nearly $7.2 billion in federal funding for the infrastructure, services and opportunities that my community deserve. I've worked hard to build better roads and rail, to boost mental health services and outcomes and to back small business, especially local manufacturers. At the same time, I've fought to protect Australians and secure our future against vested interests and grave threats, both at home and abroad. For three years Australians have suffered crisis after crisis, thanks to the Albanese Labor government and their teal and green allies, from antisemitism and the cost of living to housing and national security. The country has paid a heavy price for this Prime Minister's broken promises and the reckless political games of the Greens and the teals. We cannot afford three more years of going down the same path, but we don't have to. The coalition has a positive nation-building plan to get the country back on track, and that is under the strong leadership of Peter Dutton. Peter Dutton will restore what this country holds dear—that is, faith and belief in itself. Hunter Electorate: Aged Care 19 13:43 Mr REPACHOLI 298840 Hunter I want to address the shameful way Mercy Services have treated the residents of their Singleton nursing home. This closure is not just a failure; it's a complete betrayal of our elderly, their friends and their families. Mercy Services decided to shut this home down with barely any warning, throwing vulnerable residents out like they were nothing. People who have spent their lives in this community—our parents, grandparents and friends—were given eviction notices. Some people were given just 14 days to pack up and leave. That is cruel. That is heartless, and that is totally unacceptable. Let's be clear: under Australian law, a nursing home must stay open until every resident has found a suitable new home of their choice, but Mercy ignored that. Instead, they pushed people into places they didn't want to go, separated them from their families and left them anxious and afraid. That is not just bad management; that's absolutely disgraceful. From day one I've fought alongside the community against this closure. I spoke with the Minister for Aged Care, joined the community's fight and stood up with families who are furious at this disgusting treatment. Mercy Services: you should be absolutely ashamed of yourselves. Their actions are a disgrace, and I will keep fighting to make sure that no other community is treated this way. Our elderly deserve better; Singleton deserves better. I will not let this stand. To the board of Mercy Services: you are an absolute disgrace for doing this to your people. You should be ashamed of yourselves. This is not at all acceptable for people anywhere in Australia, let alone Singleton in the Hunter. Hughes Electorate: International Women's Day Awards 20 13:44 Ms WARE 300123 Hughes This year, the women of Hughes celebrated International Women's Day at my breakfast at beautiful Doltone House, Sylvania, on 6 March. This was an opportunity for me to recognise and value the contribution the women of Hughes make within our local community. My Young Woman of the Year was Grace Thorton. Aged only 21, Grace is an inspiring single mother of two who has designed the THRIVE program—a peer support program for young mothers facing trauma, homelessness, domestic violence, substance dependency and mental health struggles. THRIVE empowers women to build their parenting capacity and break cycles of intergenerational disadvantage. My Senior Woman of the Year was Dolores Gonsalves, who supports the homeless around Central Station in Sydney by personally providing essential toiletries, ensuring that people who are often overlooked can feel refreshed, more confident, respected and valued. With kindness and conversation, Dolores reminds some of our most vulnerable Australians that they do matter. My Woman of the Year was Dr Alison Short. Alison was recognised for her lifelong commitment to the allied health profession of music therapy, through which she currently mentors and supports a range of evidence based music projects that make a difference across mental health, special education, palliative care and aged care. Most recently, her research work used music to support anxiety around fertility treatment. I give a big shout-out to the women of Hughes. International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination 20 13:46 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton Last Friday was the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. In a perfect world, it would only take one day to eliminate racial discrimination. We observe this day on the anniversary of the Sharpeville massacre in South Africa in 1960, when police killed 69 people at a peaceful demonstration against apartheid pass laws. John Howard orange-washed this horrendous historical event and turned it into our Harmony Day. Australians now observe this day because we know that racism harms not just the lives of those who experience it but also society as a whole. Despite knowing this, there are times when some politicians just can't help themselves. When somebody shows you who they are, believe them. What is the purpose of announcing a policy that would allow a different class of Australian citizenship—where, depending on that class of citizenship, one-third of Australians could be removed from this country if they misbehave? What is the purpose of blaming overseas students for the housing shortage, when we know that we all have to build more houses? What is the purpose of exploiting the trauma of an overseas war for domestic political gain? As politicians, we must remember that our words matter. People use the words they hear to justify their own actions—some, unfortunately, are negative. As we embark on the 2025 federal election campaign, let's remember that, when we give airtime to forces that aim to discriminate or cause division, distrust and intolerance, we all lose. Australia is so much better than that. Animal Welfare 20 13:48 Dr WEBSTER 281688 Mallee I rise this afternoon to call out inner-city green activists who are seeking to destroy farming in this country. Western Victorian farmers have worked the land for generations but are being put out of business by the ideological protection of dingoes and wild dogs, which cruelly attack, gut and leave sheep to die a slow death—until farmers find them and give them the bullet the dingoes should have had. Farmers are powerless to protect their livestock from this shocking fate. This hypocritical position—where wild dogs are seen as endangered, with no scientific evidence, and sheep are left to die in pain—beggars belief. Astoundingly, animal activists are dead silent on the mutilation and torture of livestock. As a result of this activist driven political agenda, masked with two-faced lies, Victorian farmers feel they are being shut down like their colleagues in Western Australia. Green activists—who will be holding Labor to ransom if they hold the balance of power in a minority government post the election—promote cruelty to farmers and sheep. But the Nationals will not stand for it. Central District Football Club 21 13:49 Mr BURNELL 300129 Spence Deputy Speaker, I've got two words for you: you Dogs! That is the cry you will hear every weekend around Elizabeth from now until September as the Central District Football Club gets the 2025 SANFL season underway. I found time on the weekend to see our women's team get their second win in a row over Sturt, and I'm looking forward to the boys' first round on Saturday up against Woodville-West Torrens. This is a club cemented into the very heart of my community, bringing families and friends together throughout the year to get behind the mighty Dogs. It's a club with decades of rich history, reflecting the heavy influence of British migrants that settled in Elizabeth throughout the fifties and sixties. The red, white and blue on the guernsey reflects this, matching the Union Jack, and you can see that influence in our vibrant fan culture today, with chanting you'd normally reserve for a soccer match. But, most importantly to me, this is a club that brings people together. Kids growing up in the north fondly remember kicking the footy on the oval at half-time, enjoying hot chips and a Coke with mum and dad in the stands, making treasured memories with family and friends and watching the Doggies bring home nine flags in 11 years throughout the 2000s. This club is a symbol of our community and it deserves to be celebrated. Go the Doggies! Bruce Highway 21 13:50 Mr WILLCOX 286535 Dawson In the last three years, federal funding for the Bruce Highway has vanished. In 2023 the Albanese Labor government slashed the historical Bruce Highway funding model from an 80-20 split between the federal and state governments to a fifty-fifty split, additionally cutting $483 million. So I was excited when I heard the announcement from the Prime Minister in January for $7.2 billion to fix the Bruce. 'The money's there,' he said—another Labor untruth. Senate estimates discovered only $432 million will be spent over the next three years. That is less than 10 per cent of what is promised. Only yesterday, another life was lost in a horror crash on the Bruce Highway south of my hometown of Bowen. Another life lost is a downright disgrace. The Bruce Highway is obviously not a priority for the Labor government. However, those opposite wasted $450 million on the divisive Voice referendum, wasted $29.9 million to rebrand existing mental health hubs and wasted $251 million to convince taxpayers the government is doing a good job. The Prime Minister needs to stop wasting taxpayers' funds. Spend the money where it's desperately needed and where it will save lives. Fix the Bruce! Domestic and Family Violence 21 13:52 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo On 15 March I attended the 'She Matters: Stop Killing Women' rally in Bendigo. I want to acknowledge the extraordinary efforts of the organisers, Bonnie, Kristal and Felicity, and thank them for inviting me to say a few words on behalf of the people of Bendigo. About 100 women and their supporters attended the rally, some of whom shared their stories or the stories of loved ones that they had lost, particularly at the hands of an ex-partner. These are some of the messages that they asked me to share with this place: Don't force my children to see the perpetrator of my abuse— and: We thought she was safe. She reported it but then she wasn't— These are some of the messages from the young women who attended the rally: I was brave and told grown ups about the bad things that had happened but no one is listening to me— and: Grownups told my mum she had to take me to the man who abused me. I told police. I was brave but now I'm scared. The Centre for Non-Violence was there and received several referrals and requests for assistance. As of 25 March 2025, the Australian Femicide Watch tally indicates 14 women have died as a result of family and domestic violence, as well as four children. One life lost is too many. We must do better. Cost of Living 21 13:53 Mr HASTIE 260805 Canning Labor's cost-of-living crisis has smashed people in outer-metro and regional Australia. Prices are up everywhere. Groceries are up, power bills are up, health premiums are up, mortgage payments and rents are up, running costs for vehicles are up, and Labor's four-wheel drive and ute tax will drive them up further. If you tow a boat, a caravan, a horse float or a trailer, you will pay more. If you drive a ute for work or an SUV for your family, you will pay more. The truth is people are hurting with Labor's cost-of-living crisis. They've been forgotten by Labor. In Mandurah, we're still waiting for the Peel Health Campus to be upgraded. We have a massive housing shortage. Young couples are priced out of our local market as they are forced to compete with cashed-up foreign investors and temporary visa holders. Our roads are congested for the same reason. Immigration under Labor is out of control. There isn't enough public transport, and my new constituents in Singleton, Golden Bay, Karnup and Secret Harbour are still waiting for the Karnup train station to be built. The Labor member for Brand has had years to get it done. The sweet spot was over the last three years. All the decision-makers were in place: she had a Labor premier; she had a Labor prime minister. Yet she couldn't get the job done. Well, I'm here to deliver for those forgotten Australians. I fought hard and I got the Lakelands train station built and funded, despite Labor resistance. I will get the Karnup train station delivered for my new constituents. Gilmore Electorate: Parliamentary Representation 22 13:55 Mrs PHILLIPS 147140 Gilmore If there were an Olympic gold medal for political backflips, the Liberal candidate for Gilmore would win hands down. After the devastating bushfires, he said he'd quit politics—but then said he'd run for Eden-Monaro. The next day he abandoned that idea. Then he wanted to represent a different electorate—Gilmore—and lost. He followed that with two failed Senate preselections to represent New South Wales, and even sounded out the state seat of Kiama. As a minister in the Liberal state government, he supported renewables. Now he has backflipped: he doesn't want offshore wind and supports the nuclear fantasy. Then, on Sky News live, he said that the 2035 Paris Agreement target was 'off the table' for the Liberal Party. The only thing was it wasn't. So he backflipped again and walked that back. It turns out backflips are in the Liberal candidate for Gilmore's DNA. When he was the state member for Bega and minister, he supported the closing of the Batemans Bay hospital to enable the creation of the new level 4 Eurobodalla Regional Hospital. He said that the community should rally together and cast their parochialism aside. Now he's backflipped on that too and is trying to fool the community. At a Kiama housing roundtable, he supported periurban development, like over those green rolling hills. Only months later, he has backflipped again. The only housing he wants is 10 to 15 years away. How can anyone trust a word the gold-medal backflipper says? (Time expired) Wages: Early Childhood Education 22 13:56 Ms BELL 282981 Moncrieff Last year, the Prime Minister promised Australia's early childhood educators—200,000 of them—that they would receive a pay rise by the end of the year. But, in typical Labor fashion, it was just another broken promise. On 5 December, the education minister declared it was 'payday' for hundreds of thousands of early childhood educators. But this was yet another misleading headline, because we know that, by the end of 2024, fewer than 30,000 of those educators had received the promised pay rise, and, as of last month, only 19 per cent of eligible educators had received it. I've spoken to countless service providers and educators who say they feel cheated by this government. Many of them have found themselves tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars out of pocket because of this scheme. It's an absolute debacle. Labor's worker retention payment has no transparency and is way too complicated—so complicated that, in fact, Labor has paid $11 million in grants to third-party groups to help services apply for the grant. And, of course, among the groups who got a share of this grant are unions! Labor must apologise for their absolute failure and broken promises to hardworking early childhood educators and to all of those educators across the sector as well. Federal Election 22 13:58 Mr BURNS 278522 Macnamara Obviously the election is almost upon us, and the Liberal ad machine is in full swing. They've got 24 ads running all around the country; 24 of their finest bits of material are running on social media. You'd think, if they've got 24 ads, one of them would have their largest policy offering. You'd think that, out of 24, they could sneak in one of their largest policy offerings. But not one of their 24 social-media ads even mentions the word 'nuclear'. It's like these people don't want to talk about the fact that they want to spend $600 billion on a crazy energy plan. But it doesn't end there. It seems like the head isn't talking to the mouth over there, because the Leader of the Opposition famously came out a week ago and said he wants another referendum; he wants a referendum, to be able to strip citizenship off Australians. Now, you'd think they'd all get around him and back him in: 'Let's get around the boss and back him in.' So it was quite surprising when the shadow Treasurer did all the media runs and had something else to say; he said that a referendum to deport dual-citizen criminals is 'not coalition policy'. Now that's really backing in the boss over there! On this side of the House, we're united. We're focused. And we're going to deliver renewables for all Australians. The SPEAKER 53517 In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded. CONDOLENCES 23 CONDOLENCES Crowley, Hon. Dr Rosemary Anne AO 23 Reference to Federation Chamber 24 14:09 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I declare that the resumption of the debate on the Prime Minister's motion of condolence in connection with the death of the Hon. Dr Rosemary Anne Crowley is referred to the Federation Chamber. STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE 24 STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE Tropical Cyclone Alfred 24 14:09 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler At the worst of times, we see the best of the Australian character. That's exactly what I witnessed firsthand during the recent storms and floods caused by ex-Tropical Cyclone Alfred: neighbours helping neighbours and people helping friends, but people helping strangers as well, and the extraordinary members of the Australian Defence Force working tirelessly to help their fellow Australians—so often, people they knew they'd never, ever meet. Let me tell you that communities across South-East Queensland and northern New South Wales were deeply reassured to see our men and women in uniform in place on the ground, not just in the response but, crucially, in the preparation that came before that weather event crossed the coast. In Brisbane, I had the enormous privilege of meeting some of our soldiers at the Gallipoli Barracks in Enoggera. I sat down for lunch with them in their mess while the rain bucketed down outside, and I listened as they told me about the reality of what they were up against. Of course, that was just after the tragic crash that saw two vehicles upended and 13 of their comrades injured in the accident near Lismore when they were on their way to help the SES. These men and women were, of course, concerned about their comrades, but they were proud of them as well—proud that they were doing what they could to help their fellow Australians in such a selfless way and with such courage. We certainly wish all 13 well in their recovery after this incident. Our nation is certainly grateful for their service. On behalf of all Australians, I also give my thanks to everyone who worked day and night throughout this event, whether it be those people at the Gold Coast disaster and emergency centre that I travelled to, including the mayor, Tom Tate, or whether it be those at the state emergency operations centre on the Treasurer's home turf at Logan. At Tweed Heads headquarters, with the member for Richmond, I was particularly pleased to walk in and see the crew from Marrickville SES there on that day. They had driven up from near my home and they were there, helping out their SES co-volunteers—quite extraordinary! Indeed, I met people in Queensland and New South Wales who had travelled from South Australia as well and had driven all that way in order to lend a hand to people who they didn't know—quite extraordinary! In Lismore, I met locals working to build their community's resilience in the face of yet another natural disaster, and I was there with the member for Page, the Deputy Prime Minister and the Minister for Emergency Management. The people of Lismore have really done it tough. They've been hit time and time again, but they have stood up time and time again. And they're determined to continue to look after that local community. In Hervey Bay last week, I met workers at the council centre, along with the mayor and along with the teachers and kids at the Star of the Sea Catholic Primary School—a school that will visit Canberra. They're not deterred; they'll be here on Thursday of this week. The littlest kids, those in years 1 and 2, were being educated in the library. Others were crowded into some of the meeting rooms because the classrooms had had the carpet ripped up. They still had the stench that comes with a flooding, and there is still quite a bit of repair work needing to be done. I went to Hendra to visit the headquarters of Disaster Relief Australia with the minister and local member—the member for Lilley. They were doing amazing work there. This is a veteran led organisation made up of 5,000 volunteers, with plans to build their numbers to 7,500 over the coming years. I'm pleased that my government's providing $38 million to provide them with that assistance. Something that really encapsulated their spirit was that, when they lost electricity, those who still had power worked from home, and those still at the headquarters just pulled up the roller door to let the sunlight in and got on with the job. It is a spirit that says a lot about our country. I do want to thank the premiers, Premier Minns and Premier Crisafulli. There were seamless operations between the three levels of government during this period. I attended Queensland disaster meetings that had different ministers. Jenny McAllister, our Minister for Emergency Management, has almost become a de facto minister in the Crisafulli government as well, given that she sat in those meetings twice a day during that period. The fact that we worked so seamlessly is, I think, a credit as well to the work that has been done to establish the National Emergency Management Agency. This is something that wasn't around in 2022. The headquarters here, where I went to daily briefings as well, is doing extraordinary work, and there's the work of Brendan Moon in Queensland—a Queenslander on the ground, certainly with the knowledge that comes from that. As events were unfolding, we provided two Australian emergency helicopters, and we transported 375,000 sandbags, including more than 125,000 from the National Emergency Management Stockpile. That's a stockpile that didn't exist before we established NEMA. We also provided six large generators and supplementary fuel tanks, and we provided approximately 1,200 Australian Defence Force personnel, as well as two ADF helicopters. We have kicked in the Disaster Recovery Funding Arrangements. As of yesterday, the figure of that contributed is in excess of $150 million. I do want to pay tribute to the workers at NEMA. Many of them are new public servants who are there serving their community. It is so deeply appreciated, and the establishment of NEMA certainly stands as a proud achievement of this government. During this term, we have also established the Disaster Ready Fund, with $1 billion over five years for disaster resilience and mitigation projects; established the National Emergency Management Stockpile to provide assets like sandbags, generators and temporary accommodation; built the capability of the national aerial fleet; and funded Disaster Relief Australia to build that volunteer workforce. I also want to thank the staff at Services Australia. I went to see them at their headquarters here in Canberra at Tuggeranong. I also visited the thousand of them who were based in Brisbane, providing payments within 24 hours of the applications coming in. And in Hervey Bay, when there was nowhere for them to work, 15 of them worked out of a caravan on the ground. That showed a true commitment to public service. I do want to conclude by expressing my gratitude to the Minister for Emergency Management, Senator McAllister. She has been quite extraordinary. She left home to go to Queensland. She was wearing a NEMA shirt because she ran out of clothes that she took away. She was borrowing things and just stayed on the ground for such a long period of time. I know that the Queensland Premier, as well as the New South Wales Premier, really appreciated her work. To everyone who has given up their time and given so freely of their hearts to help their fellow Australians, I thank you. You remind us that we're always better together. Honourable members: Hear, hear! 14:19 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson I thank the Prime Minister for his words and for his update. I do also want to add words of thanks to the many people who were involved in what was an incredible preparation period but also those involved in the response period as well. I had the great fortune of speaking with SES workers and many first responders who were preparing, many of whom had travelled from Townsville and other places which had been affected by natural disaster, most recently in relation to flooding. In fact, I acknowledge—I was just speaking to the member for Herbert before—the flooding that's taking place in Townsville right now and people who are sandbagging and worrying about their businesses and their homes in that greater Townsville area. But they were there, rolling their sleeves up, and they were involved in the response. It was again a demonstration of that great Australian spirit. The work, in my own case, of the Moreton Bay council and Moreton Bay city, was exemplary. I acknowledge the work of not only Peter Flannery but also Adrian Schrinner in Brisbane City Council and Tom Tate on the Gold Coast, all of whom I caught up with and who did a remarkable job of responding. I also want to acknowledge the work of Premier Crisafulli, who was able to lead the state in an exemplary fashion and, to his great credit, provide the initial planning and the response as well. I want to thank the member for Page, the member for Moncrieff, the member for McPherson and the member for Fadden and all of those who were involved. I was just speaking before to Scott Buchholz, who was talking about growers in his electorate who still hadn't received the necessary support that they needed to get up on their feet again and to recover from what was a very serious event for them. We know that, for those people in Lismore, as the Prime Minister rightly pointed out, this is yet the latest devastation for them and for their communities. That is something we really acknowledge in this place. There were about 44,000 insurance claims made, but the response of all of those, including Disaster Relief Australia and those in uniform, is something that we acknowledge. We also acknowledge the loss of life of Tom Cook, who was 61 years of age, as well as the 36 Defence Force personnel who were involved in the collision, and we wish a speedy recovery to those who are still unwell and still recovering from what was a terrible event. MINISTRY 26 MINISTRY Temporary Arrangements 26 14:21 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I advise the House that the Treasurer will be absent from question time today and I will take questions on the Treasurer's behalf. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 26 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Economy 26 14:22 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson My question is to the Prime Minister. Before the last election, Prime Minister, you promised that Australian families would be better off. The Prime Minister promised a $275 cut on 97 occasions before the election. Instead, they've gone up by $1,300. We've had the largest fall in living standards in history, our country is divided and 29,000 small businesses have gone broke. This Prime Minister's record adds up to nothing. How can struggling Australian families and businesses possibly afford another three years of the Albanese government? 14:22 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for his question. He speaks about division—the great divider of Australian politics. I note that, in his talk to the party room this morning, he spoke about the division in their ranks behind him. That is what he was worried about. He was worried about the undermining from those opposite, picking on Angus Taylor, picking on the shadow Treasurer. The SPEAKER 53517 The Prime Minister will refer to members by their correct title. Mr ALBANESE R36 No wonder those opposite, when asked a question on Insiders or on the other Sunday programs, cannot say anything about what their policies are, what the costings are or what their alternative is as they go forward. Tonight, we will hand down a budget that confirms the fact that inflation is going down. We inherited an inflation rate that had a six in front of it, and it was going up. It's now at 2.4, and it's going down. We inherited low wages, being a key feature of their economic architecture, and now wages have gone up five quarters in a row. We inherited legislated tax cuts that were aimed at all of us in this room, not the people we represent, and we changed it so every Australian got a tax payout. Those opposite said, 'We should go to an election,' last year as a result. What we have done—and you'll see more tonight—is provide cost-of-living relief, because we understand that Australians have been under pressure from global inflation. So that is why we have provided a range of cost-of-living measures, all of which have been opposed by those opposite. We, of course, have had two rounds—and then we announced on Sunday that in the budget tonight there will be a third round—of energy relief. It's all opposed by those opposite, and they have the hide to talk about gas reservation from time to time. Well, part of the cap on gas and coal was about reservation—was about making sure that the manufacturing sector could have access to that gas. But they've just discovered it as well. They opposed the cheaper medicines policy that we've put in place. They opposed every other measure, including cheaper child care. They opposed free TAFE and said, 'People don't value it because it's free.' Every single measure that has been put forward, they have opposed. They don't know what they're for; they only know what they're against. And what they have are secret cuts that they want to implement after the election. (Time expired) Budget 27 14:26 Dr GARLAND 295588 Chisholm My question is to the Prime Minister. How will tonight's budget continue the work of building Australia's future, and are there any other approaches? 14:26 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for Chisholm for her question. Tonight, the Treasurer will hand down his fourth budget, and it's a budget that invests in building Australia's future, a budget that helps every Australian with the cost of living, which remains our top priority. Because of the hard work that we have done, the Australian people, our economy is turning the corner. Inflation is down. Wages are up. Unemployment is low. Interest rates have started to fall. And we've achieved this the Australian way—looking after each other, working together, not copying from other countries but investing in the things that work for us. Tonight's budget will deliver new cost-of-living relief to every Australian in every part of the country. Every household and business will receive another $150 off their power bills. Tonight's budget makes a record investment in education. We know that, when those opposite came to office in 2013, their first budget ripped $50 billion out of health and $30 billion out of public education. Yesterday, I announced our schools funding agreement with Queensland Premier David Crisafulli. This brings every single premier and chief minister to the table, to make sure that every Australian child can have the resources that they deserve so they can fulfil their potential, so they can be not left behind. It's a really important reform of which we are very proud. Tonight's budget strengthens Medicare and increases urgent care clinics. Instead of the 50 that we promised, we've delivered 87, and we're going to deliver another 50 on top of that. On top of that we have the $1.7 billion we've produced for increased hospital spending in the next year. On top of that, of course, is our cheaper medicines policy. Now, we will make medicines even cheaper—just $25, the same price that they were way back in 2004. This year, Australians will face a very clear choice: Labor's plan to keep building or Peter Dutton's promise to cut everything. We know that the Leader of the Opposition has a record of gutting Medicare, and we know he has a plan to do it again. If you want to know what people will do, have a look at their track record. We know he's got to find $600 billion for nuclear reactors somewhere. When he cuts, the Australian people pay. The test for his budget reply is whether he comes clean on what he's going to cut to pay for his reactors. Environment 27 14:29 Ms LEY 00AMN Farrer My question is to the Minister for the Environment and Water. In recent days, the Prime Minister has expressed no confidence in this minister by introducing specific— Mr Dreyfus HWG What a lot of rubbish! The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The Attorney-General may not like what is being said, but he shall not interject while the deputy leader is asking her question. Out of courtesy to her, she will be invited to begin her question again. Ms LEY 00AMN My question is to the Minister for the Environment and Water. In recent days, the Prime Minister has expressed no confidence in this minister, by introducing specific legislation to curtail and override her powers under the EPBC Act. Under the new legislation, does the minister retain the power to stop salmon farming at Macquarie Harbour after the next election? 14:30 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney I'd like to thank the former minister for the environment for that question. I say to her—she received the report of Professor Graeme Samuel into John Howard's broken environment laws. She had every opportunity as the environment minister at the time to fix it, and she did nothing. This amendment to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act is a very specific amendment that will apply in very limited circumstances to reconsiderations, a very small number of reconsiderations that meet four particular criteria. The criteria are that the original decision was not a controlled action, if undertaken in a particular manner; that the activity underway is ongoing or recurring; that the activity had been ongoing or recurring for five years before the reconsideration application was submitted; and, finally, that the activity is being carried on under the supervision of a state or territory government—for example, a state or territory environment protection agency. Under the existing law—as the former minister for the environment should know—an activity, including an established industry, could be shut down overnight if an environmental assessment had to commence. The former minister for the environment could have fixed this problem. She could have fixed this problem in any way she chose to, when she was the environment minister, but she didn't. As I said at the beginning of my answer, this applies to a very small number of potential decisions. Of the 7,000— The SPEAKER 53517 I'll listen to the Manager of Opposition Business. Mr Sukkar 242515 The point of order is on relevance. The question asked whether the minister retains the powers. The minister seems to be suggesting that this bill is completely unnecessary and that she does retain the power, but it can't be relevant to the question. The SPEAKER 53517 I'll hear from the Leader of the House. Mr Burke DYW The rule on direct relevance applies to the entirety of the question not just the last few words, and the preamble in that question opened it wide up. The SPEAKER 53517 The minister was asked a pretty specific question. I am listening carefully, and she's giving information about the legislation and the characteristics around it. I want to make sure she is being directly relevant. There was obviously a political component to the question, at the beginning, which she's also entitled to address as part of the question. Ms PLIBERSEK 83M As I've said every time I have been asked about a specific determination under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, if I predetermine something that is potentially litigated before me as a decision-maker, that ends us up in court—just as when the Leader of the Opposition, last week, said that he had already made a decision about a Western Australian project the resources industry in Western Australia blanched. They went white because they were so worried about the prejudgement of a potential decision and the fact that they would end up in court, as they have in two specific court cases that the Minister for Resources is dealing with right now. (Time expired) Health Care 28 14:34 Dr REID 300126 Robertson My question is to Minister for Health and Aged Care. How is the Albanese Labor government making medicines cheaper for all Australians? Why is it important to make medicines cheaper? And what are the risks to cheaper medicines? 14:34 Mr BUTLER HWK Hindmarsh I thank the member for Robertson for his question. He knows that, when we came to government, about a million Australians were saying they were either deferring or not filling at all the scripts their doctors were giving them because of cost. That's why the member for Robertson promised his electorate on the Central Coast that we would make medicines cheaper. We have delivered on that promise. There are 66 million additional free scripts for Australia's pensioners. We made the biggest cut to the price of medicines in the history of the PBS—down to $30—and we finally allowed doctors to issue 60-day scripts, giving patients twice the amount of medicine for the price of a single script. Already, these measures alone have saved Australians $1.3 billion at the pharmacy counter, but we know we can do more. That's why this year we froze the price of PBS medicines for Australia's pensioners right up until the 2030s. That's why last week the Prime Minister announced that we will cut the maximum price for general patients even further, down to just $25. Had we done nothing in this term of parliament, that price would have hit $50 next year—not $25 but $50. For example, the half-a-million Australians who are now on Eliquis, a very important stroke prevention medicine, would have been paying $600 a year for that life-saving medicine. Next year, with a 60-day script, they'll pay just $150—a 75 per cent saving delivered by Labor. As the question says, of course, all of this progress is at risk. Last week, as the Prime Minister said earlier, the Leader of the Opposition said, 'Past performance is the best indicator of future practice.' And he's right. So let's look at this man's past performance. Of course, as health minister, he tried to jack up the price of medicines by up to $5 a script and make pensioners wait even longer to access the free medicines we're currently delivering them by the tens of millions. This term, more recently, they voted against our cheaper medicines policies and consistently described our measures as 'wasteful spending'. As we lead into the election, my guess is that the Leader of the Opposition is now going to put his hand on his heart and promise there will be no cuts to Medicare: 'Cross my heart. Hope to die. Stick a needle in my eye!' It's just like in 2013, when, time and time again, he promised there'd be no cuts to health. Well, we know there'll be cuts, and we know Australian patients will pay, because that's his past performance—because, in his heart of hearts, he's never supported Australia's Medicare. He wants an American style system of user pays. (Time expired.) DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 28 DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 30th National Schools Constitutional Convention 28 14:37 The SPEAKER 53517 Before I call on the Leader of the Greens, I would like to inform the House that present in the gallery today are participants of the 30th National Schools Constitutional Convention being held in Canberra this week. These exceptional year 11 and 12 students have been selected from across the nation to explore the Australian Constitution and our system of federation. On behalf of the House, welcome to parliament. Honourable members: Hear, hear! QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 29 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Environment 29 14:38 Mr BANDT M3C Melbourne My question is to the Prime Minister. Your government has approved over 30 new coal and gas projects, and now, on the eve of an election and under cover of the budget, you are gutting our environment and climate laws, removing scientific protections against more coal and gas and other corporations and driving an iconic species to extinction. Prime Minister, after three years of broken promises on the environment, why are you now doing what the Leader of the Opposition asked by gutting our climate and environment laws? 14:38 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler What absolute nonsense from the member for Melbourne, the leader of a political party that stopped climate action the last time we were in government on this side of the House. They stopped climate action and, as a direct result, led to Tony Abbott sitting in this chair. That's what occurred. But what my government has done proudly is not just have effective climate change targets of 43 per cent by 2030 but a plan to get there through our Capacity Investment Scheme, through our Safeguard Mechanism and by working with business to make sure we get the investment in renewables which is occurring. We're making sure that we do that. Across the board, in the environmental reforms that we have put in place, we are targeting making sure that more of our lands and waters are protected. Just on Saturday we had, through this environment minister, a $250 million announcement to expand land protection in this country so that we work there. Whether it's that, the urban rivers program or the work that we've done in the Murray-Darling Basin, we're making sure that that protection is there. Right across the board, my government is one that has led on climate and the environment, not just here but in the work that we're doing globally as well. Australia is now out of the naughty corner and back around the table, acting on climate change as part of global efforts and acting on the environment. That's why, also, we follow the science. The member referred to the issue of Macquarie Harbour. We have committed $37.5 million to maugean skate conservation, including through the successful captive breeding program, remediation and expansion of the oxygenation program in the harbour, which the science tells us is working. What you can't do, and what we will never do, is say: 'We don't care about jobs. We don't care about science. We only just back ideology.' But those opposite in the Tasmanian Greens have never seen a job they don't want to destroy. They don't support the Marinus Link project to provide renewable energy from Tasmania to the north island; that will make a difference. They're opposing wind farms in Tasmania as well, right across the board. Wherever there's a job, they're opposed to it. As a Labor Party, we will always defend jobs but we'll also defend sustainability very proudly. Schools 29 14:41 Mr LAXALE 299174 Bennelong My question is to the Minister for Education. What is the Albanese Labor government doing to build a better and fairer school education system? Are there any risks to this? 14:42 Mr CLARE HWL Blaxland I thank my friend, the best member for Bennelong we've ever had. Yesterday the Prime Minister signed an agreement with Premier Crisafulli to fully fund all public schools in Queensland. This is the last piece in the puzzle. This agreement means that now every public school in the country will be fully funded. No government has ever done this before. This is the biggest new investment in public education by an Australian government ever. It's worth an additional $16.5 billion over the next decade. It's not a blank cheque. This is tied to the biggest reforms to school education in decades—real and practical reforms designed to help children who fall behind when they're little to catch up and keep up and to help more young people finish high school. And it's bigger than that, because, as we all know, a good education can change lives but a good education system can change countries. It's changed ours. Under Bob Hawke and Paul Keating the number of children finishing high school jumped from 40 per cent to almost 80 per cent. That was nation changing. It created jobs and businesses that otherwise wouldn't have existed. When the Liberals were last in government, they ripped the guts out of public school funding—$30 billion worth—and we're still reaping the consequences of that today because since then the number of kids in public schools finishing high school has dropped from 83 per cent down to 73 per cent. This is what we have to turn around. It's what these agreements fundamentally are all about. This is real microeconomic reform. If we're going to build Australia's future, if we're going to build the country of our imagination, then we need people to build it. This is about helping more young people finish high school and then go on to TAFE or to university to build the skills that they need for the jobs that exist today and will exist tomorrow. That's what this is about. This is what Labor governments do, and it's what Liberal governments always try to undo. Labor builds, and the Liberals cut. It's what they did last time; it's what they'll do again. The Leader of the Opposition said as much himself the other day when he said, 'You should look at what politicians do as much, or probably more, than what they say.' Well, there it is. There's all the evidence you need that he'll cut and you'll lose—that he'll cut funding from our public schools and it's parents who will pay, it's children that will pay and it's every Australian that will have to pay—all for $600 billion worth of nuclear reactors. North West Shelf Project 30 14:45 Ms PRICE 249308 Durack My question is to the Minister for the Environment and Water. Will the minister make a decision on the future of the North West Shelf gas expansion before the upcoming election? 14:45 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney I thank the member for Durack for her question. The department is assessing the project in accordance with Australia's national environment laws, which, as we all know, were put in place by John Howard's Liberal government. Every single time I've been asked about a decision in this place, I have consistently said that I don't comment on decisions before me. The reason that I don't comment on decisions before me is, as the Minister for Resources can tell you, it leads to court cases. She's been engaged in two court cases, cleaning up the mess of the previous government where the previous government and the previous Prime Minister, when he swore himself in as a secret minister, prejudged a decision and it ended up in court. But I can say very clearly that our broad approach will always be to follow the law and to follow the science. As I said about the Leader of the Opposition's reckless announcement last week, all he did when he made his reckless announcement last week on the North West Shelf, which is exactly what I've been asked about— Mr Sukkar 242515 The point of order is on relevance. There's no way that the minister commenting on the opposition can be relevant to the question, which was, 'Will the minister make a decision?' Secondly, on the substance of her answer, we're not asking for an explanation on the substance of her decision. It's the timing of the decision, and the timing of the decision cannot be relevant to what the minister has rebutted. Certainly, talking about the opposition can't be relevant. The SPEAKER 53517 The minister was not asked about the Leader of the Opposition or alternative approaches. She has been dealing with, and giving her explanations around, the decision. That's definitely been in her answer. If she's going to talk about any other policy—she won't be able to. She's got to talk about what she was asked about when the member for Durack asked her about the North West Shelf gas extension. Whatever she says will have to be relevant to the question because it was a very tight question, so she can't go into alternative policies unless it's specifically about what she was asked. Ms PLIBERSEK 83M I was asked specifically about a decision on the North West Shelf Project, and I was asked about the timing of a decision on the North West Shelf Project. I have explained that it's important to not prejudge these decisions. If we prejudge these decisions, they inevitably end up in apprehended bias questions before courts. The Minister for Resources has had to clean up two apprehended bias court cases generated by the previous government prejudging resources projects. Opposition members interjecting — The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Ms PLIBERSEK 83M I'm explaining exactly how I'm being relevant. The SPEAKER 53517 The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will help out by not interjecting as much. Ms PLIBERSEK 83M What I would say is that it would be very dangerous for me, as a minister, or for anyone else to make a prejudgement about any project. If someone did that, the most likely outcome would be that that project ended up in court. Mr Dutton 00AKI It's about timing. Is it before or after the election? It's a basic question. The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The minister is answering the question and is being directly relevant by explaining why she's not going to give the answer you want. She's giving specific reasons why that is. She couldn't be more directly relevant. She may not give you the answer on the timing, but she's explaining why that's the case. I can't make her answer the way you would like her to, but, in anyone's opinion, she's being directly relevant. Ms PLIBERSEK 83M I'll finish by saying it would be foolish in the extreme to prejudge a project like this because it just ends up in court, like your last ones did. Energy 31 14:50 Ms SITOU 298121 Reid My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. How has the Albanese Labor government prioritised acting on energy prices? What would alternative energy policies mean for household bills and the budget? Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! We're just going to take the temperature down on this one. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! There's far too much noise. The minister has the call. 14:51 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon I thank my honourable friend for her question. The Albanese government has prioritised urgent action on relief for households when it comes to energy prices with three rounds of household energy bill relief—two of which were opposed by those opposite and the third of which was announced by the Prime Minister and the government on the weekend for an extra $150 worth of support for Australian families, because that's what Australian families need and deserve. In a period where energy prices are elevated around the world, the Albanese government has got the backs of the Australian people to help them through that period. Of course, the other thing we're doing is continuing with what the experts say is the best plan for the cheapest energy prices going forward. Whether it's the Australian Energy Market Operator or the Australian Energy Market Commission or the Australian Energy Regulator, all three of our expert bodies have said at various points over the last 12 months that the best thing we can do is keep on going with the rollout of renewable energy. The Energy Regulator herself pointed out that, in the last quarter of last year, there were 23 high-price incidents as a result of coal-fired power outages. We've got to replace that coal-fired power with new, cheap, reliable energy, and that is what we are doing. The member for Reid asked me if there are any alternatives, and I can tell her and the House there are. There's one big and expensive alternative, and just because the Leader of the Opposition doesn't talk about it anymore doesn't mean it has gone away. You've announced it. It's there. It's on your books. You can't run from it now. The Leader of the Opposition will have to own this policy all the way to the next election. This policy will put upward pressure on prices in a couple of ways. Firstly, it'll keep that coal in the grid for longer. The Leader of the National Party has talked about it himself. He's been honest about it and said: 'We need to sweat these assets longer. We need this coal-fired power for longer.' That means more unreliable power, and it means more expensive power. The other way it will impact is the fact that this is a $600 billion cost to the taxpayers. The shadow Treasurer was on Insiders on Sunday. He was asked about this. He couldn't remember the cost, and then he said it was $600 billion, and then he just kept saying it's 44 per cent cheaper. Now, what he didn't reveal is that that's based on producing 40 per cent less electricity. The Leader of the Opposition will be up on Thursday. Perhaps he's going to announce their health policy, with 40 per cent fewer patients by 2050 to make it cheaper; or their education policy, with 40 per cent fewer students to make it cheaper; or their defence policy, in which they will cut Defence by 40 per cent—because that's what they do. They just say: 'We'll just make less. It'll cost less.' All this spending will have to be paid for by cuts. We agree with the Leader of the Opposition—look at past performance. He's cut health before. That means that, when it comes to the Leader of the Opposition, he will cut and the Australian people will pay. Coalmining Industry 31 14:54 Ms LANDRY 249764 Capricornia My question is to the Minister for the Environment and Water. With the Labor governments of New South Wales, Victoria and Western Australia actively extending the life of coal-fired power stations, can the minister confirm how many coalmining approvals she has approved in this term of government? 14:54 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney Fewer than a dozen. Housing 31 14:54 Mr LIM 300130 Tangney My question is to the Minister for Housing and Minister for Homelessness. How is the Albanese Labor government helping working Australians to buy a home of their own, and are there any alternative approaches that would make it harder to buy a home? 14:55 Ms O'NEIL 140590 Hotham I want to thank my friend the member for Tangney for his question. He's a fantastic advocate for more housing in his community and right here in the parliament. We all know that we're in the midst of a housing crisis that's been a generation in the making, and, after a decade of complete neglect by those opposite, we're tackling this problem from every angle. We know that the long-term fix here is to build more homes. That's why we're working with the states to build 1.2 million homes over five years, and it's why we're making those huge generational investments in social and affordable housing. But first home buyers need our help right now. That's why we've expanded the Home Guarantee Scheme. One hundred and fifty thousand Australians have gotten into homeownership through that scheme since we've been in government, and there's more help on the way. After many months of blocking and delay by the Liberals and the Greens, Labor's Help to Buy scheme is coming. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Fisher is now warned. Ms 140590 This scheme is going to support 40,000 nurses, aged-care workers and childcare workers that live in our communities to get into homeownership. They'll do it with a two per cent deposit, and the Australian government will help with 30 or 40 per cent of their mortgage. As part of the budget, we've expanded the eligibility for that scheme so that more Australians can get that help—help to those on middle incomes and to many more homes around the country. We're making real progress on housing. Since we've been in government, half a million homes have been built around the country. We've got 28,000 social and affordable homes that are in planning and construction. A million Australians are getting an increase in Commonwealth rent assistance of 45 per cent, 150,000 first home buyers are being assisted and housing approvals are up by 22 per cent. There's a lot more work to do here. Housing has been central to our first term, and, if we're re-elected, it will be central to our second. I want to contrast that with those opposite. Remember that they didn't even have a housing minister for most of the decade that they were in office. And get this one, Speaker: did you know that, for the entire first two terms of the coalition government, they didn't build a single social and affordable house around our country? Not for the entire first two terms! And, of course, we know that they want to cut $20 billion of investment in housing funding in the middle of a housing crisis. But I'm asked for alternatives on homeownership, and there's one that really stands out here—it's a real doozy—and that is the dud 'super for housing' policy. If you went into a laboratory and tried to cook up a way to make the housing problem worse, this is the policy that you'd end up with. It's going to increase house prices by about $92,000 on average across our capital cities. The SPEAKER 53517 Just pause, Minister. The member for New England is continually interjecting. I've already warned him. He's now officially warned. If he interjects one more time, he'll leave the chamber. It's just not acceptable to be continually interjecting during a minister's answer, no matter who they are. The minister has the call. Ms O'NEIL 140590 And, of course, we know this policy is going to leave young people worse off in their retirement. It's going to facilitate a massive intergenerational wealth transfer from the young people who are up here in the gallery to that older property-owning generation. It's rare for me to agree with the Leader of the Opposition, but, on this occasion, I will. He was asked about this proposal in 2017; he said, 'It's just not good policy.' Well, for once, he was actually right. Coalmining Industry 32 14:59 Ms LANDRY 249764 Capricornia My question is to the Minister for the Environment and Water. I refer to the minister's last answer. Can she confirm if she approved more than six to 12 coal projects? Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The member has asked her question. We'll do this right. The member is entitled to ask any question she wants. She's going to be given that courtesy, and she'll ask the question again. Ms LANDRY 249764 I refer to minister's last answer, where she said that she had approved fewer than 12 coal mines. Can the minister confirm what the number was between six and 12? 15:00 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney I thank the member for her question. The number of coal mines or extensions approved is 10. Four have been cancelled. Gas projects: there have been three extraction projects approved. Renewables: more than 80 have been approved, and there are about another 130 in the system, which is a real indication of the way our economy is changing. I understand why the Liberals and Nationals are sensitive about this. They were warned when they were in government that there were 24 coal-fired power stations facing closure, and they did absolutely nothing to prepare for those closures. What we have done is see this massive rollout of renewable energy, because that's what the market is investing in. Those opposite used to believe in market policies, particularly driving our energy sector. They had 22 energy policies; they didn't land a single one. In contrast, the Minister for Climate Change and Energy has seen at 15 gigawatts of renewable energy already added to our energy grid. That's more than the Leader of the Opposition's nuclear power plants could hope to achieve in 25 years time if he spends $600 billion of taxpayers' money, if the state and territory governments agree to allow him to change their laws and if he can find four times the amount of water that the coal-fired power stations need to generate electricity. I understand why they're sensitive about it. We are on track to see renewable energy reach 82 per cent of our grid by 2030, and I'm really proud to be part of a government that is doing that. This is one of the biggest transformations in Australian history, and it's on track. It's on track because we've got a prime minister who has shown leadership and an energy minister who has delivered. Employment 33 15:02 Ms BELYEA 309484 Dunkley My question as to the Minister representing the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. How are Australian workers better off under the Albanese Labor government, and what risks are there to this progress? 15:02 Mr BURKE DYW Watson Thanks to the member for Dunkley for asking a question about the economy and about the cost of living. It's only with every second question that you realise that's an issue in Australia. When we hear from over there, on budget day of all days, they've abandoned any discussion about what might be happening in Australian households—completely abandoned it. There's a series of changes that we've made to workplace laws. They have improved people's flexibility and have improved how much money they are getting into their household every single payday. Changes that have been made because of reforms that this side of the House and the Albanese Labor government have taken to the parliament are now finding their way into improved outcomes for the wages of every working Australian. Every single one of those changes, those opposite opposed—every single one of them. Bit by bit, they're gradually letting on that not only did they oppose them on the way in but they're now wanting to cut them if given their chance. Every Australian worker knows the simple truth that, when the Leader of the Opposition cuts, they will pay. When he makes cuts, they will pay in their pay packets every time. Some of the issues he tries to dress up. We had the whole conversation about working from home. Yet, what was his solution? His solution was job share. Job share means pay cut. If you've got a full-time job, where you're working some of those shifts from home—thinking about the way that people can be packed up in traffic in my part of Sydney, you can absolutely understand why some people want this flexibility. If the only answer is 'job share', that means 'pay cut'. When he cuts, people pay for that. He also wants to scrap the right to disconnect, where he's making sure that people would work longer for less. Once again, he'll cut people's entitlements; they'll pay with the outcomes. But it's workers across the board. Take just one workplace that the Leader of the Opposition might have heard of. One of the changes we made was to get rid of zombie agreements. One workplace had an agreement that had been struck in 2007, was meant to expire in 2012 and was still running in 2022. At this workplace—as I said, he will have heard of them; they run some restaurants—the workers were receiving no weekend penalty rates. Some of the workers were receiving no public holiday penalty rates. Some of the workers were being paid for 38 hours but working 50 hours. The company was Merivale, and once again the Leader of the Opposition is making it clear that he'll cut and that workers will pay. (Time expired) Kennedy Electorate: Infrastructure 33 15:06 Mr KATTER HX4 Kennedy Prime Minister, your completion of the Great Inland Way cuts 1,800 kilometres off the round trip to Melbourne, but there are only intermittent connections to Cairns's paradise coast tourism and its 13 per cent of Australia's farm produce. A tunnel would have rescued 400,000 people trapped last month, resulting in four deaths. Brisbane's population is 1.2 million. Its Olympics gets $62 billion. Brisbane tunnel is $36 billion. North Queensland gets nothing. Prime Minister, please give North Queensland diversion of the upper Herbert, the Seymour-Gairloch bridge, the one-kilometre Bridle tunnel and Queensland governments past and present a kick in the head. The SPEAKER 53517 I'll just remind all members about the language that they use in questions and how they're phrased. Mr Katter HX4 I could have used another part of the anatomy. The SPEAKER 53517 No, that's more than enough, Member for Kennedy, thank you. 15:07 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for Kennedy for his question and for his strong and sometimes colourful advocacy for North Queensland. I travelled to his electorate to look at the Ollera Creek Bridge with the member, with the Hinchinbrook mayor, with the Queensland Premier and with the emergency services minister following flooding in February. One of the things I've been working very closely with the Queensland Premier on as well is making sure that we build back better and we don't just recommit to having things done exactly the same way, because then you get the same washaway when you have a major flood. I thank the member for his very strong advocacy. It is expected that there will be further heavy rain in days to come as well. We are contributing over $11 billion to disaster recovery efforts right around the country, supporting long-term recovery, but we're also making important investments in his region of the world: obviously, the Bruce Highway, to which we have committed an additional $7.2 billion, taking our government's total investment in the Bruce Highway to over $17 billion going forward; the Inland Freight Route between Mungindi and Charters Towers, $800 million, which is important; the Kuranda Range Road west of Cairns, $210 million; the Peninsula Developmental Road, including the Archer River bridge, some $220 million; and, of course, the Kennedy Developmental Road as well, $97.3 million to complete the seal between the Lynd and Hughenden, where I visited with the member for Kennedy. I can announce today that this will allow us to progressively seal and widen the road as well in the region around Winton. That will make that possible. I'm not sure about standing orders in terms of pre-empting budget announcements, but there have probably been a few in past days. I can confirm that in tonight's budget, as well, there will be additional funding for the Barron River bridge, which has been really important in terms of connecting Cairns to the member for Kennedy's electorate. That is something that we've done—in cooperation, again, with the Queensland government. I look forward to working with the member for Kennedy, as I always have, to deliver for his electorate. We have had record funding in roads, but also there's more to do in energy, with the CopperString project and with the employment opportunities in his electorate. (Time expired) Department of Veterans' Affairs 34 15:10 Ms LAWRENCE 299150 Hasluck My question is to the Minister for Veterans' Affairs and Minister for Defence Personnel. What impact have workers at the Department of Veterans' Affairs had on claims processing, and are there any threats to that progress that would leave Australian veterans worse off? 15:10 Mr KEOGH 249147 Burt I thank the member for Hasluck for her question. It was great to go and visit the Bellevue RSL with her recently for an announcement of funding for their new cenotaph. We went with Trish Cook, the Labor candidate for Bullwinkel, as well, because Bellevue, of course, is changing. It was great to meet with all of the veterans out at the Bellevue RSL. When we came to office, there were some 42,000 veteran claims in the backlog at DVA that had not even been looked at by anyone within DVA. As a result of the Albanese government's investments into the Public Service, employing more staff in the Department of Veterans Affairs and, importantly, converting those staff from labour hire and non-ongoing contracts to become permanent public servants, we have cleared that backlog. Of course, there are now more claims coming into the department than ever before. The workforce is getting through those claims because it's able to work faster than before, getting them in front of someone within a fortnight and determining those initial liability claims in just a few months. That means that we need to have more support to get these claims determined to get benefits and support out the door faster to veterans who need and deserve it. That's what the Albanese government did. Senator Hume wants to take the Public Service back to 2022, when that backlog was what we inherited. It emerged because there wasn't enough resourcing in the Department of Veterans' Affairs. In fact, yesterday she said that that increase in staffing to DVA should be reversed. We had the Leader of the Opposition saying he wants to roll back the additional public servants under this government. Then they said, 'No, no. It won't affect frontline staff.' Then yesterday Senator Hume said she specifically wants to cut back on the frontline claims processing staff in the Department of Veterans' Affairs. Well, I say to the senator and I say to the opposition that only in February the secretary of DVA said in estimates: If the staffing numbers were reduced … it would have a rapid impact on decisions; they would then start to sit for longer with the department for allocation and for decision. New backlogs would begin to emerge because there would not be the same number of staff as there is every day now to make those decisions. …   …   … They would wait longer for those determinations and would not be receiving the benefits. We would see a return to the bad old days of the previous Liberal government: a re-emergence of backlogs, with veterans waiting and not receiving the benefits that they need and that they deserve to be able to receive. So I have a message to Australia's veterans: when it comes to the Leader of the Opposition, when he cuts, you pay. Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union 35 15:14 Ms McKENZIE 124514 Flinders My question is to the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government and Minister representing the Minister for Women. Has the minister asked her department to identify how much taxpayer money has been siphoned to organised crime through the CFMEU on infrastructure projects? If so, what action has she taken as a result? 15:14 Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR Ballarat I'll answer that in my own capacity as the minister for infrastructure who is responsible for the agreement that we have between every state and territory on the delivery of infrastructure projects. Be in no doubt: the behaviour that we've seen from the CFMEU is absolutely unacceptable, and this government has taken the strongest possible action to actually deal with it. For 10 years you talked about it, but you didn't actually do anything about it. This government has placed the union in administration, which means—and the reason that some of these issues are now coming to light is because of that— Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 No. The minister can pause. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition's screaming across the chamber; other members are interjecting. The member for Fisher's on a warning; the member for New England is on one. The minister is answering, directly, a question that she was asked by the member for Flinders. How about we just tone it down. Just listen to what the minister is saying. She's providing information to the House and she deserves to be heard in silence. She has the call. Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR As I said, we have taken the strongest action by placing the CFMEU in administration, and some of the issues that are now coming to light are coming to light because it is in administration. And we are dealing with those issues. From an infrastructure point of view, what we did was: obviously, we have supported the appointing of the independent administrators. We asked the Fair Work Ombudsman to undertake a targeted review of all enterprise agreements made by, particularly, the Victorian branch of the construction division of the CFMEU that apply to the Big Build projects. We requested that the AFP investigate allegations and work cooperatively with state police to investigate and prosecute any criminal breaches. We will use our procurement powers to ensure that enterprise agreements on government funded projects are genuine agreements and that workplaces are free from coercion and intimidation. Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR Really? Really? Mr Sukkar 242515 Yes, really. The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The minister will pause. The Manager of Opposition Business, on a point of order. Mr Sukkar 242515 The point of order is on relevance. It was a very tight question and asked the minister if she has asked her department how much taxpayers' money has been siphoned to organised crime—not agreements; not cooperation with other agencies. 'Have you asked your department: has Australia taxpayers' money been siphoned to organised crime?' If you haven't asked your department to do so, you're free to say no. The SPEAKER 53517 I just want to make sure the minister is being directly relevant about the question she was asked. It was a very specific question regarding one element of allegations, but she just needs to make sure that her answer, when talking about the subject matter, is directly relevant to what the department has done and what action she's taken. Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR As the member who just interrupted my answer then knows, the Commonwealth does not directly procure infrastructure projects. We do those through agreements with every state and territory. But where the Commonwealth has direct funding and a contracting role—such as with the Western Sydney airport—I have asked, quite some time ago now, my department to advise me in relation to all of those projects. The Minister for Finance and I wrote to chairs of the ARTC, the Western Sydney Airport Corporation and National Intermodal seeking assurances that they comply with all relevant laws, demonstrating efficient, effective, economical and ethical expenditure of taxpayer money, and that allegations or instances of improper or criminal conduct be reported immediately. We did that sometime ago. Where the Commonwealth partners with states and territories, we've got a new federated funding agreement, and in that agreement we embedded new requirements for our funding agreement, to prevent these issues from occurring, including emphasising the importance of our— (Time expired) Manufacturing Industry 36 15:19 Ms MILLER-FROST 296272 Boothby My question is to the Minister for Industry and Science. What is the Albanese Labor government doing to make more things in Australia? Are there any risks to Australian manufacturing? 15:19 Mr HUSIC 91219 Chifley Thanks to the member for Boothby for the question. She knows the importance of manufacturing to our economic and national security. Making more things here will ensure that we can stand on our own two feet and weather shocks in the global economy. Ensuring Australia is a country that makes things has been a central priority of the Albanese government, which is why we stepped up to back the Whyalla Steelworks, which makes 75 per cent of structural steel in this country, going into defence, construction and infrastructure. What's good for Whyalla is good for Australia. It's important to keep making aluminium in Australia, which is why we have a long-term, $2 billion plan to do just that. We need to invest in new, smarter, more efficient ways to make steel and aluminium, which is why we have another $750 million invested to do just that. We're helping exporters by investing millions to promote our Australian Made brand in new and traditional markets overseas. Our $15 billion National Reconstruction Fund has seen nearly half-a-billion out the door over the last few months, backing firms to make more here, from heavy mining equipment to cutting-edge quantum technology, standing shoulder to shoulder with Aussie blue-collar workers and Aussie manufacturing and sticking together to forge our own future in the face of an uncertain time. I'm asked about risks. Those opposite had three years to come up with any plan that would show that they could back Australian manufacturing, and they have absolutely nothing to show. The coalition have no plans, because they don't care. They are good at pointing out problems but never there with a solution. On everything our government put forward to back Aussie manufacturing, the coalition said no. They were just nasty and negative. Why? Because it makes it easier to cut investments in Aussie manufacturing, because they don't have the guts to tell workers now what they will cut. We build; they cut. They also want these cuts to fund a $600 billion nuclear fantasy that will cost too much, deliver too little and deliver it too late. But what simply stunned me was the failure of the coalition to back Aussie steel and aluminium in the face of tariffs just announced. They didn't put our country first. They didn't put Team Australia first. They put their political interests first. And then the coalition leader had the gall to say, 'We would have saved Australia from those tariffs.' The same mob who couldn't build a commuter car park can now navigate international trade. We stood up for the country; they would sell it out. We will speak up for the nation—no ifs, no buts. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Wannon is seeking the call on a point of order. Mr Tehan 210911 I was wondering whether the minister could table the document he was reading from. The SPEAKER 53517 Was the minister reading from confidential documents? Yes, he was. Environment 36 15:23 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah To the Prime Minister: 50 per cent of Australia's GDP is reliant on nature, yet the bill that your government is ramming through today will further weaken environmental protections by creating an exemption to national nature laws for a polluting industry. It will reduce accountability and risk pushing the World Heritage valued maugean skate to extinction. With your government and you as PM already breaking the 2022 election promise to strengthen nature laws, do you accept that there can be no trust this election in commitments on protecting the environment? 15:23 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for Warringah for her question. But let's be very clear about what happened with our environmental laws. We went to an election in 2022 saying we would have a national environmental protection authority. That legislation passed this House and sat over there in the Senate for month after month after month while crossbenchers tried to connect it up with a whole range of other issues that were not related to the legislation that was there. Publicly they did it. This isn't any secret here; that is what they said. They said, 'unless you take action to stop all forestry and unless you do a whole range of things' that they wanted connected to that legislation, they would not pass it. And then, when the legislation was eventually before the Senate, the crossbenchers, including Fatima Payman, who was elected as a Labor senator but ratted on the Labor Party to sit on the crossbench, made it clear that, having received under about 0.1 per cent of the vote, she would oppose that legislation, along with other crossbench members. So be careful what you vote for when you vote Independent because you never know what you will get. What you know from us is we will stand up for the environment. The Greens political party held up that legislation and refused to vote for it month after month after month. If they had wanted to vote for it, they could have at any time. Not only did they not vote for it; there were deferrals, just like there were over housing legislation, just like there were over so many issues. They were standing in a corner and pretending that they had no responsibility. We have 25 votes in the Senate out of 76. I suggest, if people want Labor government legislation, they vote Labor in both houses when it comes to the election coming up. Pensions and Benefits 37 15:26 Ms STANLEY 265990 Werriwa My question is to the Minister for Social Services. How has the Albanese Labor government helped Australians receive income support payments? What approaches would leave Australians on these payments worse off? 15:26 Ms RISHWORTH HWA Kingston I'd like to thank the member for Werriwa for her question and for her advocacy for families and people in her electorate. Of course, throughout this term of government, Labor has been working hard to support every Australian deal with the global cost-of-living pressures that they are under. That includes people on income support payments and, of course, family payments. We know that it has been tough for many people, and that's why the Albanese Labor government has worked hard to bring inflation down, get wages moving, keep unemployment low and ease the cost of living. This includes action to strengthen our social security safety net, to raise working-age payments and student payments, to give single parents more support and to boost Commonwealth rent assistance to help people manage rental pressures. Alongside that, we also have our regular indexation, to ensure that payments keep pace with the cost of living. Combined with indexation and our back-to-back increases in Commonwealth rent assistance, rent assistance has increased by 45 per cent in the three years since Labor was elected. Pensions are up by 16.7 per cent, giving a single age pensioner an extra $150 in their pocket every fortnight. This is complemented by Labor's changes to make medicines cheaper, to help households with their power bills and to strengthen Medicare. The member has asked me what other approaches there could be to make people worse off, and I will point her to those opposite, who have declared that government spending on increases in payments, increases in rent assistance and indexation is reckless and wasteful. If elected, they've said that they will start by making $350 billion worth of cuts to government payments and government services. This is to pay for their $600 billion nuclear folly. We know that this means cuts for pensioners, single parents, students and families. You might ask: how do we know that? We know it because they've done it before. We all remember 'no cuts to the pension'. That was a Tony Abbott promise. When they were in government, they cut the pension, they cut family payments and they tried to end bulk-billing and make medicines more expensive. There is a choice in this election. Australians can look to us, the Labor government, to build a better future, or to those opposite, who cannot deal with the costs that this Leader of the Opposition will impose. When he cuts, Australians pay. (Time expired) Mr Albanese R36 I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper. STATEMENT BY THE SPEAKER 37 STATEMENT BY THE SPEAKER Budget 37 15:29 The SPEAKER 53517 Before members leave the House, I have a short statement to make about proceedings for the budget and budget reply. I ask all members to note the usual arrangements in place for budget week and, importantly, the courtesies that will apply to the Treasurer's budget speech this evening and equally to the Leader of the Opposition's speech in reply on Thursday evening. As with all proceedings of the House, the member with the call is entitled to speak without interruption. In accordance with precedent, should I determine that a member be required to leave the House under standing order 94(a), the member will be advised by written note. I ask all members to ensure that their guests arrive at the galleries in good time to undertake the secondary security clearance and to be seated by 7.10 pm. I trust there will be cooperation from all members and their invited guests in the galleries, for whom they are responsible. To finish off: for the information of members, the speech clock will be on, but only as a guide. There is no time limit for the Treasurer or the Leader of the Opposition for this debate. I thank the House. DOCUMENTS 37 DOCUMENTS Commonwealth Ombudsman 37 Presentation 37 15:30 The SPEAKER 53517 I present the quarterly report by the Commonwealth Ombudsman under section 712F(6) of the Fair Work Act 2009 for the period 1 July to 30 September 2024. Department of Parliamentary Services 38 Presentation 38 15:30 The SPEAKER 53517 I present a corrigendum to the Department of Parliamentary Services annual report for 2023-24. Document made a parliamentary paper. AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORTS 38 AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORTS Reports Nos 24 to 28 of 2024-25 38 15:31 The SPEAKER 53517 I present the Auditor-General's audit reports Nos 24 to 28 from 2024-25. Details of the reports will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings. Documents made parliamentary papers. DOCUMENTS 38 DOCUMENTS Presentation 38 15:31 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. MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE 38 MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE Cost of Living 38 15:31 The SPEAKER 53517 I have received a letter from the honourable member for Fairfax proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely: The Government's failure to manage the economy and ease pressure on cost of living. 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— 15:32 Mr TED O'BRIEN 138932 Fairfax Let me start with some truisms: (1) Australia is the greatest country in the world; (2) the Albanese government is the worst government in Australian history; and (3) only a Dutton led coalition government can get Australia back on track. As we come to this next federal election, there is only one key question that Australians really need to ask themselves: do they feel better today than they did three years ago? Even in this chamber, the echo is no. When the Australian people do answer that question and say, 'No, we don't feel better,' they know that the last thing they should do in the ballot box is vote for a Labor candidate. But there is one thing worse than another term of the Albanese Labor government, and that is a term of a Labor-Green-Teal minority government. Australians already know, after just one term of this government, that their standard of living has dropped more than in any other developed nation in the world, bar none. Australians are copping it. Their standard of living has dropped woefully. There is not a developed nation in the world where residents are feeling a drop in their way of life worse than Australians are. That is a direct consequence of this Labor government. If you look at the skyrocketing prices for food, education, health, housing, rent, insurance, electricity and gas, all of these have had at least double-digit rises in prices. In some cases there have been rises of over 20 per cent. In other cases, such as insurance, gas and electricity, it has been over 30 per cent. Prices have gone up. How's that for a track record for just one term in government? Can you imagine the damage they will wreak on the Australian economy and the Australian people if they're given yet another three years, let alone with the Greens and the teals as part of a minority government? I think the issue here is that the Labor Party does not understand the importance of the economy, nor do they understand how to manage the economy. They have, indeed, never worked in the economy. In fact, what you have is the Attorney-General giggling as he leaves in shame because he doesn't have real-world experience. Indeed, what you see—he's coming back now, the Attorney-General—is that he is like the rest of the front bench. They're nothing more than a sales and marketing department for the CFMEU— Mr Dreyfus HWG What a farce! Mr TED O'BRIEN 138932 and what you are is their chief marketer. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Order! Enough! Mr TED O'BRIEN 138932 You and the rest of the front bench of the Labor Party are nothing more than sales and marketing for the union movement. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Member for Fairfax! Before I give you the call, Member for Deakin, I have a few comments to make myself. That was completely out-of-order behaviour. Member for Page, you were also part of the out-of-order behaviour. Let's not add to the slanging match that just took place. You can make your strong, robust arguments without descent into that. I'm going to give you the call again, Member for Fairfax. I'd like the member for Isaacs, the Attorney-General, to either remain and be orderly or leave the chamber. Is there anything further that the Manager of Opposition Business had to add? Mr Sukkar 242515 No, Madam Deputy Speaker. I was going to raise the point that the minister was finding it difficult to control himself, but I think your remarks have dealt with that. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 I think the entire House had a little challenge in that regard. So let's try again. We are in an MPI, and I do give you latitude for debate. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Member for Groom, do you want to join in the Speaker's discussion here or what? Let's try and stick to the topic. I give you the call, Member for Fairfax. Mr TED O'BRIEN 138932 As I was saying, this Labor government does not understand how to manage the economy. They do not understand the importance of the economy. In the coalition, on the other hand, we understand that the economy is not an end unto itself but, rather, that a strong economy is the means by which you underpin a strong standard of living. A strong economy is the means by which you can guarantee Australians' way of life. A strong economy is the means by which Australians can pursue whatever it is they wish to pursue. A strong economy is what allows people to buy houses, to afford the rent, to afford to educate the children and to pay for their health care. A strong economy is what allows our broader nation to be strong within a volatile Indo-Pacific. But this Labor government does not understand the importance of a strong economy. Labor sees an economy as nothing more than an ability to take money from taxpayers and play with it with whatever their latest ideological proclivity might be. We know that right now Australians are actually paying the highest level of income tax that they ever have. Up to 26.1 per cent of people's income, by average, is being paid in tax. That has grown enormously under this government—by around about three per cent. They want to continue to take people's money. This means that the average Australian ends up being out of pocket by about $3½ thousand because of this government's tax take. For a couple, two income makers in one house, that's $7,000. The thing is that, with the money they have left after they've given another $7,000 to the Labor Party government, they can buy less anyway because everything has gone up because of this government's homegrown inflation. Of course, we know that Labor is very proud of the fact that they have already announced a $150 energy relief package as part of the budget they'll announce tonight, something the coalition will not stand in the way of, because we know that, under their policies, Australian families are on their knees, hurting. We know that Australian businesses are closing at a rapid rate. Some 29,000 businesses have gone insolvent, in large part due to the failed energy policies of this government, so we will not stand in the way, but let's not kid ourselves as to the business model of the government. Really, the energy relief payments by this government, which now add up to somewhere around about $6.8 billion, are nothing but mopping up a failure in energy policy, and yet the Treasurer sells it as a virtue of how wonderful the Labor Party is. Seriously? He is a modern-day Fagin taken out of a Charles Dickens novel—teaching the caucus of the Labor Party how to play with their constituents' money. You see, what you do is you sneak up behind them, you take $150 out of their back pocket and then you run in front of them and go, 'Aha! Here is $150,' and you put it in their front pocket. Then you say, 'Aren't we great? We're fixing the energy problems.' This is their business model. They have no solutions to deal with the problem. Of course, we're talking about Australians paying $3,500 more in tax on average under this government, so it is only 150 bucks they are going to get back in the front pocket. Everything else goes to the ideological dreams of the Labor Party, and nobody steals more than the Minister for Climate Change and Energy—just as an aside. We are talking about tens of billions of dollars on his 'all eggs in one basket' renewables-only program—a program that is already driving Australian businesses to the wall. We are seeing industries close, we are seeing regional Australian economies hauling out, and we are seeing manufacturers closing the doors and relocating to Asia as a direct consequence of these policies. Those opposite want to close down baseload power stations. They would suffocate gas. Their renewables program is running at half the pace that they promised it would, so Australians are now paying among the highest prices for electricity in the world. This is a direct consequence of this Labor government. This is cost-of-living pain directly caused by this Labor government. Their only solutions to energy are (1) to keep going for an 82 per cent renewable energy grid, (2) that they want green hydrogen—it was in the paper today—which will require a doubling of the grid to deliver on that dream, and (3) that they want to import natural gas. This is their solution. It is a disgrace and all of you— (Time expired) 15:42 Mrs DZW Richmond ELLIOT (—) (): The choice at this year's coming election is so incredibly clear: we have Labor's plan to keep building Australia's future or, indeed, the Liberals' and Nationals' plans to cut everything everywhere. That is their only plan. We know they have at least $300 billion on cuts proposed, but they will not tell us exactly where. Is it in health or social services, perhaps in the NDIS, infrastructure, in areas or agencies like the National Emergency Management Agency? We don't know where these cuts will be, but they will be catastrophic for the Australian people. It is a very, very clear choice at this election, with us building and them cutting. That is all it is: build or cut. The Leader of the Opposition will make families worse off by cutting the very things they need. He has done it before and he will definitely do it again. Those opposite don't have any plans at all except their one plan—the $600 billion nuclear madness scheme; that is all they have. What will they cut to pay for that? The end result of all that will be much higher power prices for Australians. Let's have a look at exactly the record, particularly that of the Leader of the Opposition and Liberals and Nationals. As a health minister, the Leader of the Opposition cut $50 billion from our public hospitals, cut funding for Medicare and tried to end bulk-billing with that GP tax. We all remember that one, particularly how unpopular it was right across the community. He also tried to make medicines a lot more expensive and charge for emergency room visits. And, of course, we all remember that the Leader of the Opposition was voted the 'worst' health minister. Let's go back even a little bit further. As we've heard a few times today as we reflect on 2013, we had the then Leader of the Opposition running around saying to people prior to the election that there would be no cuts—no cuts to health, no cuts to education, no cuts to pensions, no cuts to the ABC and no cuts to the SBS. What did they do as soon as they got in? Cut all of them—every single one of those. Let's come back to the present day, to the Liberals and Nationals that we have here. Let's look at what they've done. They've opposed Labor's tax cuts for every taxpayer. They've opposed Labor's Medicare urgent care clinics. They've opposed Labor's cheaper medicines plan, opposed Labor's cheaper childcare plan and opposed Labor's energy bill relief in the past as well. All of our cost-of-living measures have been opposed by the Liberals and Nationals. Australians need those cost-of-living measures, and they have opposed every single one. The fact is that now Australians are earning more and keeping more of what they earn under Labor. But the fact is that they'll be working much longer for less under the Liberals and Nationals. That's what will happen. We are so focused on the cost of living and the tax cuts for every taxpayer, and do you know what they are focused on? The only things they're focused on are tax breaks for bosses, long lunches and golf days. That's about it. That's what they focus on. We focus on everyday Australians and the cost-of-living pressures that they have. It has been absolutely clear cut that that's our focus and, of course, that will be the focus tonight in the Treasurer's fourth budget speech. Again, we will see that focus on the cost of living, which is so important. Of course, when we came to government, inflation was high and rising, real wages were falling and living standards were declining. Under our government, inflation is almost a third of what it was at the election and is falling. Real wages are growing again. We have recorded the lowest average unemployment rate of any government in 50 years and we've overseen the creation of more than a million jobs, because our economic plan is all about helping Australians earn more and keep more of what they earn. We do that because responsible economic management is so importantly at the core of this government and all that we deliver. I'd like now to turn to some of those cost-of-living measures that we have in place. We understand that people have been, and are still, doing it tough. That's why our entire focus is on cost-of-living measures. First of all, we have had, of course, those tax cuts for every taxpayer. Can I tell you, in an electorate like mine on the North Coast of New South Wales, that's more than 70,000 people that have had a tax cut. We have provided energy bill relief for every household, and we just announced an extra $150 in energy bill relief, extending our energy rebates until the end of 2025. That builds on the $300 energy rebate we already delivered to households. And, of course, there are the cheaper medicines that are so vitally important for Australians. We've said that scripts will cost Australians no more than $25 under the PBS, and the cost for pensioners and concession card holders will remain capped at $7.70. That's going to make a huge difference in the lives of so many Australians, particularly our senior Australians. One of our other cost-of-living measures is cheaper child care, which is so important for families—particularly for getting women back into employment—and so important for our economy as well. We've also provided our HECS relief, and we have announced—if re-elected—a 20 per cent cut from HECS debts, which will really help younger people with HECS debts in particular. And, of course, there is free TAFE. What a game changer this has been in terms of training Australians. Again, in an area like mine, 5,000 people were able to access TAFE because of Labor's free TAFE. We also have our Medicare urgent care clinics and our Medicare mental health clinics, where people can walk in for free. At those, you only need your Medicare card. We're doing that on top of increasing the bulk-billing rebate for everyone so more people can access a doctor when they need it. We are absolutely committed to strengthening Medicare; we always have been. We also, as part of so many of the measures we've introduced, invested in social and affordable housing, including recently expanding the Help to Buy scheme as well, so that more younger people and renters can get into the housing market. We have also strengthened our social security safety nets, which are so vital in this country. Particularly, we have increased rent assistance by 40 per cent and increased pensions by almost 17 per cent since we came to government. As I said before, the Liberals and Nationals oppose all of those cost-of-living measures. They've always opposed them—all along the way and all along the line. The fact is Australians would be much worse off under the Liberals and Nationals. We know that to be an absolute fact. I'll just add that, whilst we are absolutely committed to building on our focus for Australia and our absolute priority is that we make sure of that every step of the way—every day that we've been in government we've done that—we are also very mindful that we have natural disasters in this country. I want to touch on that briefly as well because it goes to the heart of what our government are committed to and what we do—that is, addressing cost-of-living measures whilst also being proactive in communities, like mine, that were impacted recently by Tropical Cyclone Alfred. That's because our government, the Albanese Labor government, is there for people and communities. That is a fact. From those hardship payments to repairing roads, we have absolutely been there. I would like to briefly acknowledge, firstly, all of those agencies that were so well prepared and worked together in my region. We had the SES, the RFS, the ADF—they were there on the ground, which was wonderful—Essential Energy, councils and Services Australia. I particularly want to acknowledge and thank the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister for being there on the ground with people in our region and for talking to them, as well as the New South Wales Premier, all of the New South Wales state ministers, our Minister for Emergency Management, Senator Jenny McAllister, and also Senator Tony Sheldon, who was our flood envoy. All of them were on the ground, every single day, coordinating and working with those agencies, and our Prime Minister was coordinating that from the National Situation Room at the NEMA, National Emergency Management Authority, headquarters here in Canberra, which is an agency we set up to respond to natural disasters because we know we have to be there for Australians whether that is every single day with cost-of-living relief or planning and providing support when we do have natural disasters. We have invested a huge amount in disaster funds and also in NEMA, but the fact is we were there on the ground with all of those agencies and it means so much to people. We also announced some of the really important payments people could access—the hardship payments of $180 and the disaster allowance—as payments for people's wages lost during natural disasters when they can't get to work or their place of work is closed. There is also the disaster payment of $1,000 for major damage, and we, for the first time, activated those payments prior to it happening, again, because we care about Australians and we address the issues that they have. We have been doing that ever since we were elected—since day one—and our main focus, every single day, is addressing the cost-of-living pressures that Australians have. That is the focus of everyone in our government, and that will absolutely be the focus of the Treasurer tonight in outlining his fourth budget and those measures that will help Australians, because we understand people are doing it tough and we are a government that continue to be committed to providing the support that Australians need, right across our nation. 15:52 Mrs McINTOSH 281513 Lindsay I have some real-life figures for you. The cost of bread is up 21 per cent. Dairy is up 18 per cent. Seafood is up 15 per cent. Fruit is up 12 per cent, and chicken is up 10 per cent. These are essential items, but Australians just can't afford them right now because of the Albanese Labor government's cost-of-living crisis. Labor have spent the election so far talking about anything and everything apart from their policy failures that are hurting everyday Australians right now. Every minister on the economic team should hang their head in shame for the way they keep patting themselves on the back, despite every Australian suffering. It's like Australians couldn't have ever had it any better than they have it right now. In addition to groceries, energy is No. 1, and it's up. The cost of energy is one of the biggest drivers of the economic harm to young people, families and seniors that are battling at this time. The draft default market offer this month highlighted a stark reminder for every person in Western Sydney. My community will be paying more than $1,300 extra on their electricity bills in the coming financial year than what this Albanese Labor government promised. Remember their tagline? It was that energy would be $275 less in 2025, which is where we are today, compared to 2022 prices. Prime Minister, you may have said that on almost 100 occasions during the last campaign trail, but I can guarantee that, when you set foot in Western Sydney during the election, it will be the first and last thing you hear from people on the ground. The Albanese Labor government's broken promise on energy costs is astounding. It's about time the energy minister actually apologised to his Western Sydney community, who are furious about the price of energy to power their homes. And I know they're furious, because I'm in the neighbouring electorate, and every time a member of the minister's community steps over they tell me how angry they are with the minister for energy. I've met with businesses in the McMahon electorate, which borders my community, and those manufacturers are struggling so much right now. Higher energy prices mean less money is being invested in their business to employ more local people to make more local products so people can get the benefit of a strong local economy, which is not happening right now. The price of gas is sky high. These family manufacturers, these cafes and these households across Western Sydney are struggling, and they know the answer is gas. We must approve more gas projects to get more gas into domestic supply lines to bring down costs. It is that simple. But this Labor government only cares about renewables. We need a diversified energy grid made up of sources that fit communities and provide us with reliable, 24/7 base-load power, like nuclear energy can, and gas as well. I've touched on groceries and I've touched on energy prices, and both of these things are heartbreaking because these are the costs that are impacting Australians. These are the costs that mean Australians who have never had to line up at a food bank previously have to do so so they can feed their families—those double-income families. This is real-life stuff. The figures are real life. You go to any local community food bank, and they can tell you this very sad story. We come to housing. Unfortunately, buying a house, a family's first home, is getting harder. A coalition government will limit housing for foreign investors, to ensure more homes are available for young couples who just want their chance at the Australian dream. Rent is at record rates in many areas across Australia, and our young people in particular are being smashed by this, as are single parents—as is every Australian. The coalition will invest billions of dollars to get sewerage to local roads and much more built to ensure greenfield development sites aren't sitting idle—which is what's happening right now—but can be approved to build great Aussie homes as soon as possible. I've touched now on groceries, energy and housing, and finally I want to talk about small business. Insolvencies are at record rates for our great local small businesses. We never hear about this from the small business minister, though. Parts of Western Sydney have some of the highest rates of business insolvencies. Australians are fed up, and we know that all they want is for Australia to get back on track. 15:57 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie Back in 2019 I sat on that side of the chamber, and I remember speaking to a deaf government about the challenges that families were facing around stagnant wage growth and the rising cost of living, and that was just completely dismissed by the people who were in charge of the economy back then. Having now been on this side of the chamber for three years and having listened to those opposite from a different perspective, I can see why. It's because they do not have a single policy that would tackle the challenges that people face. They can whine and they can moan and they can stir people up. We know that people have been hurting. We know what the consequences have been. That's why we put forward sensible, thoughtful measures—not to fix everything instantly, because none of it has a quick fix, but to address and ease the pain that people are feeling. Unfortunately, nothing we've heard from anybody opposite offers any alternative approach—how they might tackle the economic issues that we face. In every budget we've handed down, we've been focused on helping with the cost of living, using the levers that we have. But we've also been very mindful that we inherited a big Liberal debt and that that needed to be paid down. We found savings in the budget, savings that those opposite were incapable of finding when they were in government. There were no savings in their budgets. They never delivered a surplus. As we found those savings, we used them to pay down debt that we inherited. We did that because we knew that we needed to provide a secure foundation for Australia to find its way in what we now know is an ever-changing world and a challenging world. Let's think about where we are now compared to where we were. When we came to government, inflation was shooting up like a rocket. It was going up and up and up. People weren't yet feeling those price increases because they take a little time to work their way through, but it wasn't long before people realised that those price increases equalled pain. We have done a total reverse on that. Not only is inflation not going up now; it's actually on its way down, and it's within a range that clearly gives the Reserve Bank confidence that it's okay to ease interest rates. That's a pretty significant thing to have achieved. We've achieved that without something that normally happens and that other countries have resorted to, and that is high unemployment. Over the last few years, together, Australians have achieved something quite remarkable—and that is that we have made substantial progress on inflation, we've got wages growing again for the first time in memory, we've got low unemployment and we've seen the creation of more than a million jobs under the Albanese Labor government. As of last week, unemployment continues to be low; it sits at around 4.1 per cent, with record participation and widespread job creation. Four out of five jobs are in the private sector. Those are jobs that businesses are having the confidence to create. That doesn't happen without a steady hand at the wheel steering the economy of Australia. One of the things I think that those in opposition fail to appreciate—and some of them might be too young to remember, and I'll forgive them for that—is that the consequences of high unemployment are not just numbers. This is not a piece of data that looks bad on a piece of paper. It's what that does to people and people's lives. It really, seriously impacts someone's self-esteem and their mental health, let alone their finances and their financial future. It impacts their relationships. It impacts our wider society as people choose to withdraw from things. It has such far-reaching consequences, and I know because I saw this in the nineties. That is not something that Labor believes should be repeated. Everything we have done, as best we could, has been with a view on minimising that impact of unemployment and ensuring that people still have jobs. I am so proud that Australian businesses rose to that and that we've got this economy where it is now. 16:02 Dr WEBSTER 281688 Mallee After three long, hard years for Australians, relief is soon at hand with the federal election in the wind. Regardless of what you'll hear tonight, the facts don't lie about the very real struggle Australians have under the Albanese government. We warned at the last election, 'It won't be easy under Albanese,' and it has proved to be far worse. In fact, Australians simply cannot escape. The Australian Bureau of Statistics shows that gas prices are up 32 per cent; rents are up 17 per cent; bread is up over 20 per cent; cheese is up 18 per cent; milk is up 17 per cent; and breakfast cereal is up 15 per cent—it's enough to make you choke on your Weet-Bix. It's no joking matter, however, with insurance also up 32 per cent. My constituents in Mallee are hopping mad about it, and they are very happy that the Leader of the Opposition has put insurers on notice to ensure insurance is affordable and accessible for Australian families and small businesses. I will be bringing Andrew Hall from the Insurance Council to Halls Gap next week to meet with constituents—business owners who've been unable to access or afford fire insurance, even though Halls Gap itself has never been burnt in a bushfire in all its history. The Leader of the Opposition, at my invitation, came to Halls Gap to talk about insurance, in contrast with the Prime Minister and Premier, who flew over the town in its time of need. Australia's cost-of-living crisis has been running for three years. The Nationals have been urging for action at the supermarket check-out to assist struggling Australian shoppers and farmers, but this government has yet again been slow to act. Grocery prices have gone up 24 per cent, compared to all other goods and services at 22 per cent. Critically, by early 2023, grocery prices were increasing at twice the rate of wage growth. The coalition has been proposing tough action on supermarkets that abuse their market power, including tough new penalties, such as a $2 million on-the-spot fine, 10 times more than Labor have pledged, and increased powers for the ACCC to conduct random audits of major supermarkets. We will create a supermarket commissioner as a confidential link between farmers and suppliers so there can be no fear of retribution, which they currently face, for speaking out about unfair prices. Of course, we in the Nationals are committed to divestiture powers as a last resort to put an end to price gouging. That's what real action on the cost of living looks like. The Albanese Labor government pretends it never said 97 times before the last election that power prices would permanently come down by $275. They've put forward in tonight's budget two $75 relief payments for two quarters, a bandaid for a gaping wound. But voters are smarter than that. They know their power prices have actually gone up $1,300. The list of pain for Australians, particularly regional Australians, after three long years of Labor goes on. In the coalition's time in office we secured 43 mobile black spot investments in Mallee, in places like Kalkee, Laharum, Minyip and Toolondo. But Labor has not funded one mobile tower in its three years. Mallee residents have had to pay for alternatives or have lost productivity due to poor mobile coverage. Productivity is also evaporating in Mallee farms in the north as Labor wastes taxpayer money buying more water from our food-producing irrigators just to send it down the river, driving up the cost of water and ultimately the cost of food at the supermarket. Fruit prices have already risen 12 per cent under Labor. Where will they go with less water to grow it with in another three years of an Albanese government? Spending in my electorate after three years of hard Labor has fallen by 95 per cent, one-twentieth of what I secured in my first term in office. Everywhere you look, Labor is robbing regions to buy votes in the inner cities, pretending Australians will fall for their tricky budgeting to get over the line this election. Only a coalition government will get Australia back on track. 16:07 Mr REPACHOLI 298840 Hunter It has been three years since Labor got back in the driver's seat. After nine long years on the road to nowhere under the coalition, this government took the wheel and has driven our economy in the right direction. The terrain has been tough at times, but we have not shied away from being up to the job. When we came to government, inflation was high and getting higher. Real wages weren't keeping up, and Australians were going backwards. Those opposite had spent nine long years driving us into the economic desert. Since we have taken the reins, we have been moving in a much better direction. Inflation has fallen to a third of what it was. Real wages are growing, and living standards are rising again. Unemployment is the lowest it's been in 50 years, and over one million new jobs have been created, the most in a single term of any parliament in Australian history. We know the drive towards a better place hasn't been easy. Australians have felt every bump and turn. But, unlike those opposite, we've felt every bump and turn with them. That's why delivering Australians cost-of-living relief has been our No. 1 focus, and all those opposite have done is stand in the way. The member for Fairfax says we've failed to ease cost-of-living pressures. I think he has been talking to himself. That's the only thing I could really think of to make any sense of this. I think he woke up this morning, looked in the mirror, thought about the last three years and went, 'Wow, we have failed to ease cost-of-living pressures!' I admire the member for Fairfax's honesty, because it's true. He, along with all of those opposite, has stood in the way of our cost-of-living relief for the past three years. They opposed Labor's tax cuts for every taxpayer. They opposed Labor's Medicare urgent care clinics, including the ones in the Hunter. They opposed Labor's cheaper medicines plan. They opposed Labor's cheaper childcare plan. They opposed Labor's $300 energy bill relief. If it would ease the cost-of-living pressures, you can bet the coalition opposed it. That's why we call them the 'no-alition' for a reason. Whilst it's never too late to admit your own mistakes, Australians wish the member for Fairfax and the coalition had looked in the mirror and had their wake-up call a little earlier. If they had supported our cost-of-living measures over the past three years, it would have made life easier for all Australians. The member for Fairfax also says that we have failed to manage the economy. After talking to himself in the mirror about his inability to support our cost-of-living relief, he's also reminiscing about the nine long years of poor economic management underneath the coalition. We know what the coalition is like in the driver's seat and what it looks like. When the Leader of the Opposition was health minister, he cut $50 billion from public hospitals. That's $50 billion. He cut funding from Medicare. He tried to end bulk-billing and made medicines more expensive. The coalition has made this person their leader because cutting is in their DNA. We know their record and what they have planned for Australia if they can manage to wrestle the driving wheel from us and take us back down the road they love—the road to nowhere. I'm proud of our economic record and the cost-of-living relief that we have delivered. Australians are earning more and keeping more of what they earn under Labor. We are rebuilding our country. We have our plan to keep building and keep easing the cost-of-living pressures. We'll provide another $150 for energy bill relief. We'll further reduce medicine prices, and Australians will pay no more than $25 per script under the PBS. We'll wipe 20 per cent off HECS debts. For all the young Australians with a HECS debt listening to this, we're going to wipe 20 per cent off it. Those opposite will get back to cutting. Those are the options for Australians—do we keep building, or do we keep cutting? Cuts aren't going to make it easier to see a doctor. They aren't going to make it easier to go to university or TAFE. Cuts aren't going to bring down energy prices. Cuts aren't going to make it easier to raise a family, get ahead or even buy a house. But still cuts are all those opposite have to offer. The member for Fairfax talks a big game, but let's get real on this. If the coalition had been in charge for the past three years, Australians would be thousands and thousands of dollars worse off under what the coalition would have delivered. Remember, they held our wages back. Remember the bills in Medicare. Remember, they tried to cut Medicare. They want to go backwards. We want to go forwards. That's what we'll continue to do as the Australian Labor Party. 16:13 Mr VIOLI 300147 Casey This was the budget that wasn't going to be delivered. We all know that the Prime Minister and the Treasurer weren't planning to deliver this budget for a pretty straightforward reason—it was going to show a deficit, and it was going to show deficits as far as the eye could see. It was going to destroy that image that the Treasurer has tried to craft around his so-called responsible economic management. The reason that we're going to see deficits moving forward is that the good luck of the Treasurer has run out. It's an important part. I'll give credit to that well-known and respected economist, Chris Richardson. The table of truth—I see the member for Parramatta smiling. I think he knows where we're going here with this one. There was $252 billion in parameter variations in the budgets that this government has delivered. Parameter variations are important in a budget, because they're the upgrades and the downgrades that the government has no control over at all. The reason this Treasurer has delivered two surpluses in the budget papers themselves is because of these parameter variations. He has had nothing to do with it. He hasn't made the tough decisions for the Australian people. In fact, his decisions have made it worse for the Australian people. The reality is there is not one Australian that is doing better today than in May of 2022, when the Prime Minister promised he would solve the cost-of-living crisis for the Australian people. The Prime Minister promised, on 97 occasions, that he would reduce power bills by $275 in 2025. Well, here we sit in 2025, and power bills for the Australian people are up by over $1,000, food is up 13.3 percent, housing is up 14.5 per cent, rents are up over 18 per cent and gas is up 34.2 per cent. This Prime Minister has no solutions to the challenges the Australian people face. At best, he can treat the symptoms with a temporary measure that he's continuing to extend but that will eventually run out. They're not treating the causes of the challenges that we face. When we look at energy prices—as I said, gas is up 34.2 per cent—to bring prices down sustainably, to help households, to help community groups and to help businesses continue to thrive, you need to put more gas into the system. More gas will increase supply, keep demand at the same level, or, if it goes up, it can bring those prices down. Looking to grocery bills, food is up 13.3 per cent. This government has done nothing to address the challenges of grocery prices. There are many factors, including energy, that drive up prices, but, when Woolworths and Coles control 67 per cent of the market, action needs to be taken to put pressure on them. This government has refused to take action. Their so-called mandatory code has not even come into effect and will make no difference on the ground. It's turning a voluntary code that wasn't working into a mandatory code that still won't work, and that's why the coalition has proposed divestiture laws. Mr VIOLI 300147 Divestiture laws are the policy. I thank those opposite for the interjection. Divestiture laws that sit as a private members bill in this house, which could be passed today, would put immediate pressure on Woolworths and Coles. If they do not act ethically, if they do not act in the best interests of consumers and if they do not act in the best interest of suppliers, food manufacturers and farmers, their stores could be sold and their market share could be broken with appropriate guardrails in place to ensure employment and to ensure that towns have the services they need. Losing their market share is the only thing that will scare Woolworths and Coles executives. I spent over a decade working for food suppliers that supplied Woolworths and Coles. I saw firsthand the predatory behaviour that they undertook, using their market power to pressure suppliers, small businesses and farmers. These laws will make them act in an ethical way, and, if they don't, they will lose their market share. Those opposite don't want to support that policy that will make a tangible difference for the Australian people and for Australian farmers and which will bring prices down in a sustainable and structural way in the long term. It's all about political spin for this Prime Minister and this Treasurer, and it's the Australian people that pay the price. 16:18 Mrs PHILLIPS 147140 Gilmore I know people in my electorate of Gilmore are doing it tough, which is why the Albanese government is taking practical steps to help ease the cost of living. I'm really looking forward to Treasurer Jim Chalmers' budget speech tonight when he will build upon our plan to provide more meaningful and sensible cost-of-living assistance. This week we have announced an additional $150 in energy bill relief for households and small business, ensuring Australians can keep more of what they earn. That's on top of the $300 energy rebate that people across the country have already received. Health care has always been a top priority in my electorate, which is why I'm thrilled that the Albanese Labor government will make cheaper medicines even cheaper with a script to cost Australians no more than $25 under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. Gilmore residents have already benefitted from Labor's cheaper medicines, saving almost $10 million on the cost of their scripts during our time in government. Under a re-elected Labor government, they will save even further, with a more than 20 per cent cut in the maximum cost of PBS medicines to save Australians $200 million each year. It's been more than two decades since Australians paid no more than $25 for a PBS medicine. In stark contrast, when the Liberal leader was the health minister, he tried to jack up the cost of medicines, he tried to end bulk-billing and he wanted to slash funding for Medicare. In opposition, the Liberals have voted to block cheaper medicines six times. With an older population, accessible and affordable health services play a critical role in my electorate. South Coast pensioners and concession cardholders will have more money in their wallets because, for the next five years, they won't pay more than $7.70 for a PBS script. Since the Batemans Bay Medicare Urgent Care Clinic opened in December 2023, we've seen more than 12½ thousand patients walk through the doors, all bulk-billed. I'm thrilled that, under a re-elected Albanese Labor government, the Batemans Bay urgent care clinic will open from 6 am until midnight, and a new federally funded clinic will open its doors in Nowra. The recently opened walk-in Medicare mental health clinics at Nowra and Moruya are also providing free access to mental health support for people in our community when they need it most. And we are expanding the bulk-billing incentive program so more people across Gilmore can see their GP for free. These are tangible ways we're helping Australians with the cost of living. I'm pleased to see individuals, families, students and seniors across my electorate already benefiting from a range of measures we have introduced to ease financial stress while placing downward pressure on inflation. From 1 July, 64,000 taxpayers in Gilmore received an average tax cut of $1,405. That's money going straight back into the pockets of hardworking locals. Gilmore pensioners and seniors are saving in many other ways, with an increase in rent assistance, the 12-month freeze on deeming rates plus a wage increase for aged-care workers and more home-care packages. We know the cost of living is biting families. That's why we've given everyone a tax cut and provided wage increases for our lowest-paid workers. The 10 per cent increase in rent assistance means an average increase of $19 per fortnight for over 8,000 people in Gilmore. We're helping people save at the checkout too, with the CHOICE supermarket price monitoring making supermarkets more competitive and allowing consumers to make price comparisons. These are real, practical savings and effective cost-of-living measures. Students are receiving a leg-up, with $3 billion wiped from HECS and apprentice loans across the country, including for 13,286 locals in Gilmore. We'll wipe 20 per cent off student debt too. Let's not forget our plan to keep TAFE free and to keep our Commonwealth prac payments for nurses, teachers and social workers, meaning they can now earn money while they learn. People of all ages and from all walks of life are already reaping the benefits of this government's responsible cost-of-living measures. That wouldn't be the case if the Liberals had their way, because those opposite have opposed our cost-of-living measures time and time again. They opposed our tax cuts for every taxpayer. They've opposed our Medicare urgent care clinics. They've opposed free TAFE, cheaper medicines and cheaper child care. And they've opposed our $300 energy bill relief. Australians would have been much worse off over the last couple of years if Peter Dutton had had his way. They will be worse off still if he wins the election. Economy 46 16:23 Mr WOLAHAN 235654 Menzies Shortly, we will hear from the Treasurer about the state of the economic books for the Commonwealth. That matters in two key respects. First, it directly matters to the state of household budgets and how they are doing. Second, it matters when we zoom out. I see there are schoolchildren visiting up above, and you are very welcome. It's good to see you. There's a document here that's about you. It's called the Intergenerational report. It is a report that first started in 2002, and it's designed for us in this place to look forward 40 years to see how we're doing and what the impact might be on you. I'm sure most of you may be about 10, 11 or 12—I apologise if I got that wrong. Imagine yourselves about our age, what this economy looks like and what our country looks like. I want to briefly tell you what it looks like in the last Intergenerational report, which was done in 2023. It looked forward to 2063. On page 144, there is a graph that matters to you and that should matter to all of us. The report says that real Australian government spending per person before COVID was $22,000. Immediately after COVID it was $24,000. It's now peaking at $28,000 per person. That's a lot of money, especially when you consider that the average household, the average person, earns just over $100,000. Half of Australians earn $65,000 or less. In this document it said, if that spending is not addressed, then adjusting for inflation, when you are our age, you'll be paying $40,000 per person. Imagine you're earning $100,000, as the average wage, and $ 40,000 of that is just for what we spend here! Then there's state spending and your local government. You won't have much left over. When the Treasurer wrote this document, 'Capitalism after the crises', published 1 February 2023, he didn't mention the Intergenerational report. Instead, he questions the fundamentals of capitalism, and how has that worked out for families? Let's test the numbers. When you look at actual family budgets right now, here in 2025, you see that average mortgage payments have gone up by 57 per cent. In the Melbourne inner city, the average mortgage is about $660,000. That is almost $19,000 worse off. If you're renting, the costs are up by 32 per cent. That's a per annum increase of almost $9,000. Groceries are up 32 per cent. When we say groceries, what do we mean by that? We mean the essentials—milk, up 18 per cent; bread, up 25 per cent; eggs, up 35 per cent. It's no wonder families are going to sleep hungry at night, it's no wonder food banks have never seen more demand, and it's no wonder families have a sense of despair that this government and this Treasurer do not have their interests at heart here and now. From the government, we hear a selective quotation about how family budgets are actually doing. We'll hear a component part that is repeated in a way that demands gratitude in return. Looking at the increase in average wages—and there has been an increase in average wages—when you add to that the subsidies that have been given, that's a good news story, or so the government will tell you. But they're only telling you part of the picture. What they don't say is that the total cost-of-living rise for families in Australia is $24,000. That's this side of the equation. They say you should be very grateful for the subsidies that they've given, the increased wages that you have seen, which only come to $8,300. So you're down $24,000 and up $8,000, and you should be very grateful for that! But that's not all. We have seen, as people's wages rise and they move through several different income tax brackets, them lose even more, to the point that families are now down. After the wage increases, after all the subsidies, the average family is down $10,636. Think about that. The average family in Australia is over $10,000 worse off after all of the good news that this government and this Treasurer tell you that you should be grateful for. The reason is that this government cannot live within its means. And, because it can't live within its means, it is creating a burden on families in the here and now, and it is creating an unexplainable and unjustifiable burden on you for when you are our age. So it is important that we, as a government, live within our means. If we don't, families will continue to suffer. 16:28 Mr BURNELL 300129 Spence This matter before the House today is a real change of pace for those opposite. I say that because I think all Australians have just become so used to the culture wars waged by the Liberals. All they have gotten from this opposition leader and his Liberal colleagues so far, when they consider the cost of living, is nothing but dog whistling in a shameless attempt to win votes. Instead of fighting the cost of living, we've seen the Liberals fight public servants. They're claiming, with absolutely no evidence, that disrupting the jobs of 36,000 Australians will somehow make your bills lower and your food cheaper, and that by attacking the services that everyday Aussies rely on—playing with cuts to the NDIS, Medicare, DVA and Centrelink—those same everyday Aussies will be better off. I'd love to see the maths on that, but the Liberals are refusing to tell us. Instead of fighting the cost of living, those opposite have also chosen to fight dual citizens, with this opposition leader pushing a national referendum to deport them. You'll notice that his colleagues are desperately trying to hose this down. It's never easy when your leader says the quiet part out loud. That, again, seems to be distracting the Liberals from the cost of living, because, instead of focusing on that, the Liberals are working to dismantle the source of over 70 per cent of energy generation in South Australia by attacking renewables. Again, it seems they've come up with that on a hunch that doing so will win over the public, because there's no evidence at all that their policy—a $600 billion nuclear fantasy—would do anything to benefit everyday Aussies or fight the cost of living, but there is evidence that their policy will cost Aussies at least twice as much compared to the trajectory we're currently on. The worst part is that the Liberals know that. They know their nuclear policy is a complete shambles. They know the independent report they tried throwing in front of it is riddled with flaws. And we know they're aware of this because the Liberals haven't mentioned their nuclear policy all year. They don't want you to remember it! Having said all of this, I'll return to how I started. This is a change of pace, because, finally, the Liberals are suddenly concerned with the cost of living. It has taken them nearly three years to get to this point—not including the last nine before that, which they apparently refuse to believe ever happened. That explains why there is absolutely zero awareness of the devastating effect the Liberal government has had on my community, or any understanding of why costs are higher. I'll happily tell the House what the Labor government is doing to fight the cost of living, and maybe—just maybe—the Liberals will do something to contribute to that. That would be more than they did in those 12 years. When Labor came to government, inflation had a six in front of it and was rising. It now has a two in front of it and is continuing to fall. Since Labor has come to government, real wages have been growing again. Living standards are rising again. It is this Labor government that has recorded the lowest average unemployment rate of any government in 50 years, having overseen the creation of more than one million jobs since coming to office. Try as they might, there is no amount of Liberal mental gymnastics that can distract from these facts. That's the picture from the national level, and it's a positive one. It's one giving Australians a platform for prosperity, despite global uncertainty. But what I'm really passionate about is what has been delivered for households. On the ground in my community, across places like Elizabeth, Salisbury and Gawler, Labor has delivered an average tax cut of $1,217 to every single taxpayer in my community, with 91 per cent of those taxpayers getting a bigger one than what the Liberals had promised. Labor has delivered over half a million free enrolments into TAFE; that's half a million people, who can be disadvantaged or vulnerable, being uplifted. Labor has delivered policy to make child care cheaper—like the three-day guarantee, to help Aussie families get in front of their costs. Labor has delivered a freeze on medicine costs for pensioners and concession holders and has tripled the bulk-billing incentive so that taking care of yourself stays affordable. Labor has delivered policy to make it easier to buy or rent a house. Labor delivered significant changes to the cost of higher education to make it more affordable. There is so much more I can say, but I will end on this. Everything I have mentioned, the Liberals have opposed at every chance they have been given. And, if given the chance, they will take it away. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 249710 The discussion has concluded. BILLS 48 BILLS Supply Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026, Supply Bill (No. 2) 2025-2026, Supply (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026 48

Supply Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026

Supply Bill (No. 2) 2025-2026

Supply (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026

Second Reading 48 16:33 The DEPUTY SPEAKER 249710 The question is that the bill be now read a second time. In accordance with the resolution agreed to earlier today, the time for this debate has expired, and I will now put the question. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 249710 I know, but we had a resolution. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 249710 I will get the terms of the resolution. I can see you on there, but I'm just following the Clerk's directions. Unfortunately, Member for Petrie, in accordance with the standing orders, there is no opportunity for debate. I will read to you the part of the motion that was moved earlier today. Moved by the member for Watson, item No. 4 says: (4) immediately following the discussion of a matter of public importance, if the Transport Security Amendment (Security of Australia's Transport Sector) Bill 2024, Supply Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026, Supply Bill (No. 2) 2025-2026, Supply (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026 and Parliamentary Business Resources Legislation Amendment (Machinery of Government Change) Bill 2025 have not passed, all questions necessary to complete consideration of the bills being put immediately; So I do apologise, but that's what the House agreed to earlier. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Third Reading 48 16:36 Ms WELLS 264121 Lilley by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Supply Bill (No. 2) 2025-2026 48

Supply Bill (No. 2) 2025-2026

Second Reading 48 16:37 The DEPUTY SPEAKER 249710 The question is that the bill be now read a second time. In accordance with the resolution agreed to earlier today, the time for the debate has expired and I will put the question. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Third Reading 48 16:37 Ms WELLS 264121 Lilley by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Supply (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026 48

Supply (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026

Second Reading 48 16:38 The DEPUTY SPEAKER 249710 The question is that the bill be now read a second time. In accordance with the resolution agreed to earlier, the time for this debate has expired and I will put the question. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Third Reading 49 16:38 Ms WELLS 264121 Lilley by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Parliamentary Business Resources Legislation Amendment (Machinery of Government Change) Bill 2025 49

Parliamentary Business Resources Legislation Amendment (Machinery of Government Change) Bill 2025

Second Reading 49 16:39 The DEPUTY SPEAKER 249710 The question is that the bill be now read a second time. In accordance with the resolution agreed to earlier, the time for this debate has expired and I will put the question. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Third Reading 49 16:39 Ms WELLS 264121 Lilley by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Reconsiderations) Bill 2025 49

Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Reconsiderations) Bill 2025

Second Reading 49 16:40 Mr TED O'BRIEN 138932 Fairfax I move: That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: "whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House notes that: (1) on the eve of a federal election, the Albanese Government has been forced to work around their own Environment Minister in an attempt to fix a political mess of their own making; (2) the Government remains bitterly divided on the future of salmon farming at Macquarie Harbour and has unleashed 15 months of anxiety and uncertainty on thousands of workers, families and communities who rely on the salmon industry, including voting against a Coalition bill to improve the reconsideration process in the most recent sitting week of Parliament; (3) this legislation is not needed to provide lasting certainty to the Tasmanian salmon industry, and instead the Government should simply have ended the Minister for the Environment's disastrous 2023 review of salmon farming's future at Macquarie Harbour; (4) the Government, and particularly the Environment Minister, must guarantee to not instigate other forms of legislation or regulations that will impose new controls or reviews on the salmon industry, including through the return of their Nature Positive legislation, Federal EPA or use of other forms of the EPBC Act, such as directed environmental audits; and (5) the changes to the reconsiderations regime in the Bill should be substantially strengthened to ensure that all assessments of all projects, across all industries, do not remain subject to the open-ended review processes that currently exist". The coalition will support this bill. We do so in recognition of the urgent need to put an end to the living hell that salmon businesses and workers in Tasmania have endured under this Albanese government and, in particular, through the actions of its environment minister. We have made the decision to support the bill's passage because it provides at least some small measure of comfort and relief to the Tasmanian salmon industry and its workers after a truly harrowing period. However, no-one should be fooled into thinking that this bill is to the Labor Party what its drafting may suggest. By way of this bill, Tasmanian salmon businesses and workers are being used as a bargaining chip in Labor's intensifying internal war on environmental issues. To Labor, this legislation isn't principally about Tasmanian salmon workers and their families; it is about factional games, internal warfare and political fixes inside Labor itself. It's a reflection of a longstanding and intensifying feud not just between Prime Minister and environment minister but between many in the ranks of the Labor caucus on environmental policy. We have recently learnt about a heated debate within caucus itself where the Prime Minister has seemingly traded off. On one hand, he has won his desire to end the minister's review on the future of salmon farming in Tasmania, but on the other he has agreed to the minister again pursuing the creation of a federal environment protection authority and, of course, the disastrous nature-positive agenda. This approach, if implemented, will cause another massive rise in green tape, severely damage investment in jobs and cause many further cost-of-living increases in the process. So it may look at first blush as though the Prime Minister has to find a way around the minister in order to close off this review, and there is indeed truth to that; there really is. But it is far deeper than even that. This is all about something far darker, and it is yet another marker of the dark arts of the Albanese Labor government playing politics for internal political processes, because a dirty deal has clearly been done. Putting the miserable internal machinations of the Labor government to one side, the very fact that salmon companies and workers in Tasmania need relief is a direct consequence of the minister's reckless decision to launch a full-throttle attack on this industry in the first place. For nearly 15 months, the government has left the industry exposed to a review that has placed their entire future in jeopardy, and it should be noted that it has resisted all sensible offers and advice from the coalition to set this right. As recently as the very last sitting week of this parliament—on 12 February, in fact—the Labor government voted against this very kind of legislation, when it was the coalition which brought it forward through a bill to help the salmon industry and change the EPBC reconsideration process. Any pretence from Labor that they really want to help the salmon industry and the workers in Tasmania is a sick joke, because history exposes the truth. It is for these reasons and more that I moved an amendment at the front end of this address. The purpose of that amendment is to try and redress some of Labor's many errors and missteps in association with the bill they put forward today and to try to provide more certainty to communities across Tasmania, particularly the West Coast, north-west, east coast and beyond. Of course, those errors and missteps trace all the way back to 2023, when the environment minister acquiesced to the wishes of three activist groups—the Bob Brown Foundation, the Australia Institute and the Albanese government funded Environmental Defenders Office—to place the entire existence of the industry, its workers and regional communities under severe threat. Outrageously, the minister has kept this review running right up until now and had no plans to end it even before the election. In the process, she created for Tasmanian workers, especially in the state's West Coast, what the local mayor Shane Pitt has described as 'cruel' and a 'living hell'. Clearly a lot of MPs in Labor would have liked the review to continue, but at least it does appear that this bill finally puts a halt to it. Let me echo the point made by Salmon Tasmania CEO Luke Martin on 21 March that this legislation is not by any means a complete fix. The legislation is also a long way from perfect with respect to the reconsideration regime in the EPBCA. It still needs several changes before it fully and adequately addresses the relevant matters, and we are, therefore, putting forward a series of amendments. If passed, the amendments we're putting forward will improve the reconsideration rules in the act to provide more certainty for everyone and will certainly reduce the ad hoc green lawfare that now proliferates against EPBCA decisions that have been settled—some, many years ago. Ours include a pious amendment that gives expression to some of the most immediate problems that would loom on the horizon for the industry and its workers, especially if the Labor Party were to win the next election and particularly if it were ultimately to form a minority government with the Greens. Each of our amendments is being moved not just in an attempt to better insulate the salmon industry from further outlandish reconsideration requests but also in recognition of the increasing vulnerability of all industries, companies and jobs that either have been implicated to date or are at risk of being targeted further in the future. Believe it or not, there are still some companies that have been waiting for the minister to finalise reconsideration processes for nearly the entirety of this term of government and, therefore, of her term as the relevant minister. Now, if, by way of this legislation, the Albanese government, albeit after being dragged kicking and screaming, has admitted that it has made mistakes, then you would think it should at least commit to serious reforms and not be half-hearted about it, as they are being, as evidenced through this bill. Being so half-hearted only has the implication of introducing further uncertainty about the rules for this industry and others well into the future. It won't surprise anyone—certainly, it won't surprise the people of Tasmania, especially those in the salmon industry—that Australia now suffers from the second-highest level of green lawfare anywhere in the world. On the environment moreover, let's be clear that Australia should always strive to ensure that whatever we do in our country has minimal adverse impact on our unique and precious natural environment, and that includes ensuring that endangered species are protected. However, the Albanese government has completely failed to take the relevant steps to help improve the future prospects of either the species in question or the salmon workers. Reductions or closures of the salmon-farming industry's operations on the west coast of Tasmania, as seems to have long been the minister's plan, would cause thousands of direct and indirect job losses. These impacts would be devastating at a local level, including by threatening the entire existence of the town of Strahan and other nearby regional communities, because there are simply no obvious replacement industries or adequate employment possibilities in those areas. The coalition have said on many occasions that we believe this minister's approach has been reprehensible. It has provided none of the necessary urgency or certainty and, in the case of the salmon workers in particular, has only created heightened anxiety and stress. Science should have been better respected. In keeping with this point, it is very important to note the significant findings of a wealth of scientific studies and observations over the last 15 months. These have included reports from the Tasmanian Environment Protection Authority, the Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies and Dr Ian Wallis and commentary from the University of Tasmania's Professor Barry Brook. Among other conclusions, these studies and observations have pointed to manifest improvements in water quality in Macquarie Harbour, to no further declines in recent years in numbers of skates, the threatened species, and instead to stabilisation and positive signs for growth and to major flaws in some of the original modelling that was provided to the Threatened Species Scientific Committee. They also indicate that any threat to the existence of skates is due to a multitude of many different factors. Such findings are obviously also underscored by the fact that, unlike in Macquarie Harbour, the skate became all but extinct many years ago in Bathurst Harbour. That is an area of Tasmania in which salmon farming has never been practised. For all these reasons and many others, the strong view of the coalition is that the skate population and the salmon industry can clearly coexist sustainability at Macquarie Harbour, and that this provides the most balanced and positive outcome for everyone. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 249710 Is the motion seconded? Mr Rick Wilson 198084 I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak. 16:56 Mr BATES 300246 Brisbane I move the amendment to the amendment circulated by the member for Fairfax in my name: That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: "The House declines to give the bill a second reading and notes the government is using the cover of the budget to rush through legislation that trashes environment laws instead of passing laws to cut student debt and triple the bulk billing incentive for GPs". Yet again we have this Labor government rushing through a dirty deal with the coalition. This legislation seeks to trash our environment laws and push our precious native species to extinction. The Australian Conservation Foundation said today that this bill will mean nature is more poorly protected at the end of the Albanese government's three-year term than it was at the start of it. This prime minister came to office with claims that the captain's calls had ended. But today, with this bill, we see the Prime Minister rushing through legislation, all to placate polluting industries and lock in species extinction. Australia is facing an environmental crisis. We have one of the highest rates of species extinction in the world and ongoing destruction of our natural ecosystems. There is no question about it; our current environmental laws are failing to protect our biodiversity. Despite promises from this government, critical reforms continue to be delayed, all while leaving species and ecosystems vulnerable to further degradation. If you want to halt the extinction crisis then saying, 'We will get to it later. We will do it next time,' is not going to cut it. We must implement stronger enforceable environmental protections as a matter of urgency. But instead, this proposed legislation has sidelined science and sends our wildlife into extinction. It undermines legal protections and has far-reaching consequences for our community and planet. Environment laws are supposed to protect the environment, not greenlight destruction and extinction. Rushing these laws through under the cover of tonight's federal budget without proper scrutiny or consideration is disgusting. Australia is a country that is rich in biodiversity but poor in its protection. We are home to over 10 per cent of the world's biodiversity with unique species that exist nowhere else on earth. We have already lost multiple native species since European colonisation began, and hundreds more species are at risk of extinction, yet deforestation, habitat destruction and climate change continue largely unchecked due to weak environment laws and poor enforcement. The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conversation Act, the EPBC Act, is supposed to be our primary environment law designed to protect these species and ecosystems but, for decades, it's failed to prevent environmental destruction. Loopholes, weak regulation and lack of political backbone from both major parties have allowed industries like fossil fuels and logging to push full steam ahead with projects that harm biodiversity. This bill would limit the ability to challenge fast approvals of harmful projects, making it even harder to protect endangered species and ecosystems from destructive developments. And if passed, this bill could prevent the legal review of past approvals that have contributed to environmental decline such as the expansion of the salmon industry in Tasmania's Macquarie Harbour, which has devastated the critically endangered Maugean skate's habitat. This Labor government came into power promising to strengthen environmental laws and establish an independent EPA to enforce them. But, of course, these critical reforms have been postponed or canned entirely and instead we have the proposed bill threatening to weaken environmental protections further. In what is expected to be our final sitting of this parliament, instead of working with the Greens and the crossbench to pass laws that will actually help Australians, Labor's working with the coalition to gut our environment laws. This bill could stop the Australian public from being able to demand coal and gas corporations be held accountable when their destructive projects are shown to be destroying nature. There would be no recourse or potential for course correction. There is nothing in this bill holding back the expansion of fossil fuel projects that will be a disaster for the climate. This bill is deceptively vague in its detail, and there are no explicit provisions excluding coal and gas approvals from this weakening of the environment laws. The government simply does not currently know what environment approvals this bill will apply to, and it certainly has no idea of the true scope to which it may apply. The government has given us merely hours to review this shameful bill. The initial analysis shows that decisions on up to 100 projects, including coal and gas mines, could be impacted. This bill is setting an unacceptable and destructive precedent to exempt polluting industries and actions from national environment law even when all the available scientific evidence shows those actions will likely send endangered species into extinction. Environment laws are supposed to protect the environment, not provide certainty to industries that they can continue to trash it. It's shameful that the Prime Minister is championing an industry that poisons our waterways and drives ancient wildlife into extinction. This proposed legislation that sidelines science will send the Maugean skate into extinction and likely will have far-reaching consequences way beyond Macquarie Harbour, all in the name of corporate profits. What this government should be doing is closing the loopholes that allow bypasses of environmental protections and ensuring that all major projects undergo rigorous environmental assessment—strengthening the EPBC, not weakening it. Without urgent action, Australia's extinction crisis will only get worse. The government must fulfil its promise to strengthen environmental protections before more species and ecosystems are lost forever. Now we have Labor promising they will fix our environment laws in the next term of government, after they promised to fix them in this term of government and now sit here in this chamber weakening them. If you're confused, it's because it's confusing. Australia needs stronger environment laws, not weaker ones. The government must abandon this bill and deliver on its promise to end the extinction crisis. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 249710 Is the amendment seconded? Ms 300127 I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak. 17:03 Mr CHANDLER-MATHER 300121 Griffith It beggars belief that, in the dying days of this parliament, in the middle of a housing crisis, a climate crisis, an environmental crisis and a cost-of-living crisis, rather than working with the Greens to pass urgent, much-needed legislation on reducing student debt or ensuring people can see their GP for free, instead what Labor are doing is teaming up with Dutton's Liberals to do a dirty deal to weaken Australia's environmental laws. The weakening of these laws may make it easier— Mr Wood E0F I raise a point of order on correct titles. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 249710 Thank you for that reminder, Member for La Trobe. The member will refer to people by their correct titles. Mr CHANDLER-MATHER 300121 It beggars belief that, in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis, a housing crisis, a climate crisis and an environmental crisis, in the dying days of this parliament, when Labor could work with the Greens to pass much-needed legislation to reduce student debt or allow people to see their GP for free, instead what Labor are doing is a dirty deal with the Liberals and Nationals to weaken Australia's environmental laws. It's disgraceful. In the context of a climate and environmental crisis devastating this country, a series of weakening laws will be passed through this parliament in a deal between Labor and the Liberals and Nationals that may well make it easier for coal and gas projects to continue into the future even where the science proves they're having a devastating impact on our environment. Why is this happening? Basically it seems to be about ensuring the destructive salmon-farming industry can continue down in Tasmania, which is leading to the destruction and extinction of a precious Australian species, the maugean skate. The problem is that it's not just this; it's even worse than that, because the way these laws are written is so broad as to weaken Australia's environmental laws and, again, make it easier for the expansion of coal and gas in this country, cooking the planet. Why on earth in the dying days of this parliament has Labor chosen to do this? When an Australian species faces extinction, they should be going out of their way to protect that native species, the maugean skate. Instead, what they're doing is pre-empting legal challenges from environmental groups that could have successfully protected this species and then changing the rules under the feet of these environmental groups just to make sure the salmon industry can continue. What is the point of having environmental laws if, every time it looks like an environmental or climate group might successfully challenge a coal or gas project or successfully challenge the salmon-farming industry and protect a native species, Labor, at the behest of those corporations, turns around, works with the Liberals, changes the rules and screws over our environment, our nature and our climate? Don't take the Greens' words for it; this is what the head of the ACF has said about this disgraceful betrayal of Australia's environment and climate: Labor came to government in 2022 promising to strengthen Australia's failing nature laws, but ends the term rushing through a bill to weaken them … This amendment knowingly risks the extinction of a unique, irreplaceable Australian species. The Maugean skate survived the mass extinction of the dinosaurs 66 million years ago, but it may not survive the Albanese government. Carve-outs for particular industries are bad news for nature. The logging industry's broad exemption to this law has resulted in untold damage to nature over 25 years. Just to be clear, in many respects, as a result of these changes, environmental laws were stronger under Morrison than they are under Labor. Not only this but the Labor Party promised to introduce an environmental protection agency, where the Greens had secured a deal, where the environment minister had written to the Greens praising the deal with the Greens. What happened? The mining industry and the WA Premier teamed up to force the Prime Minister and this federal Labor government to renege on a deal to improve and strengthen our environmental laws. That's genuinely shocking because it begs the question: who runs this country? I thought it was meant to be this parliament, not the mining industry, not coal and gas corporations, not the salmon-farming industry. Why is it that, every time the coal and gas corporations or the mining industry ask for something, they get it? What about the millions of Australians right now struggling to make ends meet? The head of Santos can ask for a rule to be changed or the law to be changed in this country, and the Labor government will go out of their way to do it. What about the millions of people in this country begging for more cost-of-living relief or the renters begging for help? They never get what they want. Why is it that, always in this place, big corporations and billionaires get rules changed overnight? This bill is ultimately a demonstration of the fact that big corporations and billionaires wield far too much power over this place, time and again in this term of parliament. When the Greens secured a deal to introduce million-dollar fines for bankers, all it took was the head of the Australian Banking Association, former Labor premier Anna Bligh, to pick up the phone and force Labor to renege on the deal in under 24 hours. Why is it that, when we were pushing to raise taxes on coal and gas corporations and make them pay their fair share in tax, we found out that when they were writing these rules there were representatives from Santos, ExxonMobil and Chevron in the room providing advice on how those corporations would be taxed? Now we come to this. In the last week of parliament the Labor Party, the Liberal Party and the Nationals are bending over backwards to serve the interests of big business at the expense of our environment, our climate and the millions of Australians who just want to see our environmental laws strengthened. It's genuinely shameful. I know there are Labor members in this place who are not happy about this move. As I understand it, there had to be three emergency meetings over the course of the weekend just to convince the Labor caucus to agree to these changes. I understand the need to maintain unity and things like that, but now is the time to speak out. How many times do we have to see the Labor Party renege on the principles they claim to represent for the interests of big corporations before Labor members in this place stand up and speak out against these actions? As long as Labor members refuse to speak out, the Labor Party is not going to change. What's clear now is that, if we want stronger environmental and climate laws in the next term of parliament, if we want to break the hold that the big corporations and the big coal and gas industry have over the Labor Party, the Liberal Party and the Nationals, and, as a result, this parliament, we need to break the stranglehold that the major parties wield over this place. The only way we are going to get stronger environmental laws, stronger climate laws and a parliament that is prepared to take on the power and interests of billionaires and big corporations is if there is a powerful crossbench made up of progressive Independents and Greens willing to push Labor to properly act on the climate and environmental crisis. That is the only way it's going to happen. There's been one government in the last few decades that has taken real, substantial action on the climate and environmental crisis with world-leading climate legislation, and that was the minority Gillard government, with the Greens and Independents in the balance of power. It took the power out of the factional bosses in the Labor Party, who far too often represent the interests of billionaires and big corporations, and put that power in the hands of the Australian parliament and, ultimately, the Australian people. If anything has been made clear over this term of parliament it is that, as long as the Australian public is forced to rely on the Labor Party, the Liberals and the Nationals, we're not going to get the urgent action we need in this country. And it starts, ultimately, by breaking the power that big corporations wield over this place. Isn't it fitting that, at the end of this term of parliament, once again we are reminded who ultimately runs the Labor Party, the Liberals and the Nationals—not the interests of the environment, not the interests of the climate, not the interests of the Australian people but the interests of big corporations? When they tell the government to jump, the government jumps and if they need to do it with the Liberals and Nationals then so be it. If you wonder why so many Australians are fed up with politics and you wonder why so many Australians are switching off politics right now, it's because they watched things like this happen. They watched the Labor Party get up and say they care about the environment, care about environmental laws, and then do two things. First, they reneged on a deal with the Greens to strengthen our environmental laws, the laws the environment minister praised as a matter of public record in the Guardian. The Prime Minister turned around and killed the deal at the behest of the mining industry and the WA Premier. And now this. Now this! But I have genuine hope that in the next term of parliament we can reverse this disastrous decision and we can start to strengthen our environmental and climate laws, protect the Maugean skate and, more broadly, protect Australia's nature, environment and climate that is currently straining under the pressure of decades of terrible decisions by both major parties in this place. I live in Brisbane, and we have just experienced a so-called natural disaster in Cyclone Alfred, but isn't it abundantly clear to everyone—certainly to all the climate scientists and a lot of the people I speak to—that this is going to happen more and more frequently until this parliament is willing to stand up to the climate-destructive coal and gas corporations and the big corporations, who far too often get their way in this place? 17:14 Ms WATSON-BROWN 300127 Ryan There is one week left before parliament dissolves, and this is how the Labor government wants to spend it—not on expanding free GP visits, cutting student debt or things that will actually help the citizens of Australia but teaming up with the Liberal and National parties to rush through environment-wrecking 'reforms', special carve-outs for multinational corporations in the salmon industry, making it, by the way, easier to approve new coal and gas. I hope everyone watching this remembers the priorities of the major parties. Are they working for the people who elected them? They're clearly working for the corporations that fund their campaigns, and they're relying on people being too distracted—so hammered and so busy trying to scrape enough cash together to see the doctor or pay the rent or just survive—to actually notice. Well, we're noticing. Labor's hoping that you didn't notice this bill. Under the cover of the budget they've just introduced some of the most environmentally destructive laws I've seen in this place, and, sadly, there have been a lot of them. As the ACF said just today, this actually means that our environment laws are weaker than they were when Labor took office. They're weaker than under the coalition. The Prime Minister has done a deal—this happens way too often—with the Leader of the Opposition and the coalition to ram these destructive laws through in this last sitting week of the 47th Parliament. They think they can get away with it. They think they can do this under the cover of darkness. No—we're not going to let them. Australians deserve political leaders who keep their promises. Labor promised to protect our environment, and they were actually elected on that promise. Clearly, that's a hollow promise now. They have just capitulated, yet again, to industry. This is for the second time in as many months. Last month they withdrew their proposed EPA at the behest of the Western Australian mining lobby; it just took a phone call from the Western Australian Premier. That EPA, which in reality was only going to enforce existing laws, was hardly a radical proposal. This time, they're bowing to the salmon-farming industry, an industry that's polluting our waterways and sending an ancient species to extinction—a foreign owned industry that, by the way, pays no tax. Is this really what Australians want—to be taken for a ride, yet again, by for-profit industries that have the government and their coalition cronies by the you-know-whats? It's not just salmon. These laws have far-reaching consequences beyond the salmon industry, creating massive loopholes for other environmentally damaging industries—loopholes big enough to drive a coal truck through. These loopholes for the other environmentally damaging industries allow coal and gas to proliferate, to keep on polluting. This is a trojan horse for that, and we should all be alarmed. Here are some facts about the foreign owned corporations—toxic, polluting multinationals—Labor and the coalition are bending over backwards for and buddying up with to protect with this bill. So-called Tassal, Tasmanian Salmon, is not in fact owned by Tasmanians. It's controlled by foreign owned corporations. It was acquired by Canadian salmon producer Cooke Aquaculture in 2022. Cooke is not pure. Cooke has a history of environmental controversies. In 2017 hundreds of thousands of fish escaped one of its net pens in Washington state. This escape caused such significant environmental damage that Washington not only ceased Cooke's operations but also banned the entire industry there. In fact, net pen farming has been banned across all of the west coast of the US and Canada. Cooke is currently the subject of a lawsuit in Maine, where it operates 13 locations. The lawsuit alleges at least 735 violations of the US Clean Water Act over the last five years, including discharging 'blood, sea lice, disease, and undisclosed chemicals from delousing boats and barges', exceeding limits on effluents and nutrient buildup, and reporting violations. Mr Chandler-Mather 300121 This is the company— Ms WATSON-BROWN 300127 It is. This is the company in Tassie. Here's another: Huon. Huon was taken over by Brazilian company JBS in 2021. Again, it's not a pure operation. This company was the subject of a huge corruption scandal in Brazil which helped finance its first acquisitions in Australia. There's not a clean history here. JBS is not very well regarded globally. JBS was also fined US$8 million for deforestation in the Amazon back in 2017. Lastly, Petuna, a company that was taken over by New Zealand-based Sealord in 2020, has also attracted significant criticism and controversy in their home country for trawling environmentally sensitive seamounts. Here's the kicker—the Tasmanian salmon industry has paid no income tax, zero, since at least 2019, despite selling over $4 billion worth of product. That's who Labor and the LNP are spending the final week of this term of the Australian parliament bending over backwards for. Fishy is a good word for it. This whole sorry saga is a great illustration of exactly why people actually hate politics. Let me explain. It's broken promises, dirty deals and media spin to cover it all up. In 2022 Labor promised that, if people elected them, they'd overhaul and strengthen environmental laws. It is the last week of parliament before the election, and Labor just broke that promise. First, they scrapped their promised environmental protection agency after a phone call from the Premier of Western Australia—anything to protect corporate mining profits, right? But it doesn't end there. They're now teaming up with the coalition for a new deal to weaken our environmental laws. They promised to strengthen them, and now they're working with the coalition to weaken them. Labor and the coalition team up to protect a destructive industry that is threatening species extinction. Did they ever plan to keep their promises in the first place? Now they seriously expect people to trust them after all this. It's absolutely shameful. Frighteningly, this isn't just a carveout for the salmon industry. It weakens our environmental laws across all of the industries. The mining industry, coal and gas companies, and logging companies will all benefit from these changes—free reign to trash our environment with absolutely no oversight. In the mere 24 hours we've had to review this shameful bill that's being smashed through the House, initial analysis has indicated that decisions on up to 100 projects, including coal and gas mines, could be impacted. It's had no scrutiny, rushed through in the final sitting week of the 47th parliament, all under the cover of a federal budget. It smells fishy indeed. Here's what should really terrify us; the Prime Minister has now set the expectation that any industry can exert pressure—dollars—to get a legislative exception to environmental laws. What ordinary person in Australia gets to choose which laws apply to them? None. Ordinary people don't have the ear of this government because they're not funding it. They're not funding it. Big corporations are funding this government. The mining companies must be absolutely ecstatic about this as it reminds them that they effectively own this government—let's face it, a government that claims to care about the environment while actively destroying it. The Prime Minister today has literally halted the other business of parliament when we could be passing cost-of-living relief, we could be putting dental cover into Medicare or we could be scrapping student debt. We could actually be helping the citizens of Australia. The Prime Minister has halted the other business of parliament to give environmental destruction the green light. Shame! 17:23 Mr WILKIE C2T Clark Let's be perfectly clear about this fact; if the parliament legislates today and tomorrow to give exemptions from the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act to projects and industries, it will be one of the most egregious acts of environmental vandalism this parliament has ever been responsible for. In fact, I would say it would be second only to the Abbott government removing the price on carbon in late 2013. The enormity of what this parliament is doing here cannot be underestimated. This country already has weak environmental laws, and, if the parliament passes this bill, they will be even weaker, because it means that, starting with the salmon industry and Macquarie Harbour on the West Coast of Tasmania but extending to perhaps hundreds of projects that were given the go-ahead more than five years ago and which have been in operation ever since on a continual basis, none of them can ever be reviewed by any future environment minister or any future government. For the Prime Minister to come in here in question time today, to ridicule the crossbench and to claim that you must vote for the Labor Party if you care about the environment is just absolutely ridiculous! Is the member for Grayndler the Prime Minister or the 'Propaganda Minister'? It was just patent nonsense, and it disappoints me because the member for Grayndler is better than that. I know he's much better than that, and he diminishes himself when he comes in here and says such absolute nonsense. The severity of what this parliament is in the process of doing cannot be underestimated. It will be a complete failure of governance. What happened, for heaven's sake, to the promise by the Labor party in the lead up to the last election that, if elected, it would strengthen our environmental framework? It turned out to be just a con job. What about public opinion? What about the fact that the vast majority of Tasmanians, when polled, want the salmon industry kicked out of Macquarie Harbour because of the environmental damage it's doing and the fact that it has helped take the maugean skate to the edge of extinction. Since when are less than 100 jobs in Strahan as important as they are? Since when are those jobs more valuable than dealing with the extinction crisis? Of course, we must do everything in our power to deal with the extinction crisis. For this parliament to be in the process of legislating killing off one of the planet's most prehistoric species—to knowingly do it with legislation like this—can't be described as anything less than egregious environmental vandalism. What about the groundswell of dissent within the ALP? You can't tell me there are not a lot of good hearted, intelligent ALP backbenchers who are in barely silenced revolt at the moment. What about them? It's a matter for the Labor Party, but it does call into question the integrity of the Labor Party when it's putting Tassal, Huon and Petuna ahead of the grassroots membership of that party. What about the environment minister? I've got a lot of respect for the current environment minister, and none of my comments are directed at the member for Sydney. In fact, I feel a certain sympathy for the member for Sydney because she's been so ruthlessly sidelined and was made to come in here and read out that speech that she read out earlier today. You could just look at the expression on her face. It was like she was talking while simultaneously sucking on the most bitter lemon this country has ever produced. That is no way to treat a frontbencher. What about the industry itself? It's a curious thing that the people who are trying to do, in their minds, the right thing by the salmon industry by effectively carving it out from the EPBC Act—what they're actually doing is hastening the demise of the industry, and I'll tell you why. The salmon industry in Tasmania is an important economic driver. It is a significant employer, and I actually support it. I actually want it to survive and achieve its full potential. But it will only achieve that potential if it is transparent, if it's very carefully regulated and if it's put on a genuinely sustainable footing. Leaving it in Macquarie Harbour to kill off maugean skate is not putting it on a sustainable footing. What it's doing is just trashing the industry's reputation even further and hastening its demise. If anyone comes in here later today to vote for this bill and claims they're a friend of the salmon industry, they're the complete opposite, because, one day, the salmon industry will be on its knees, and the people who support this bill will be the ones to blame. Let me talk about the maugean skate for a moment longer, and I proudly wear a little decoration of the maugean skate on my lapel. It is one of the most historic species on the planet. It is a remarkable creature. It survived for millions of years—millions of years. So what does it make of all this talk about us dealing with the extinction crisis? When we come in here and we're going to vote on this, seemingly the government, maybe with the opposition—hopefully they will see sense and oppose it—are going to knowingly vote to make one of the oldest species on the planet extinct. It's just breathtaking. It's absolutely breathtaking. It makes a complete mockery of everything that people say when they're wringing their hands and talking about the environment and how good they are on the environment, saying, 'If you care about the environment, you've got to vote for the Labor Party.' Ms Sharkie 265980 It's bollocks. Mr WILKIE C2T Yes, what bollocks! It's just garbage. Let's wrap a bit of context around this, because it's not just about Macquarie Harbour and it's not just about the maugean skate. At the moment, Tasmania is confronting the largest mass farmed fish die-off in the state's history. I'm sure by now many honourable members would have seen photos or footage on the telly perhaps of, literally, tip-truck loads of dead fish being taken somewhere to be buried on someone's farm or at a toxic waste dump or something. What we're also seeing from video footage that has been obtained and what I'm also hearing from whistleblowers is exactly what's in these industry documents. Let me tell you something about the character of the industry. This document is noted from 2014, but it was actually in use as recently as 2018. The relevant company claims there's a newer version of this document but refuses to release it to the ABC when pushed. It's titled Mass mortality. That sounds very relevant, doesn't it? Mass mortality—as Tasmania goes through the largest mass mortality in the industry's history. It says: In any large mortality event, as many fish as possible should be recovered for harvest and processing. Any fish—this is any dead fish that has died in a mass mortality event, which at the moment is called the Rickettsia bacteria—in which the gills can still bleed is potentially recoverable … Gross! By the way, this document, Emergency procedure in the event of significant risk to fish health, says: WHENEVER AFFECTED FISH ARE > 3KG, ROLLOVERS SHOULD BE BLED AND PLACED INTO ICE SLURRIES SO THAT THEY CAN BE PROCESSED IF APPROPRIATE In other words, at the moment, in Tasmania, fish that have died from Rickettsia bacteria in this appalling fish die-off, so long as their gills are still pink, with a bit of blood in the gills, and so long as the fish aren't already rotting on a beach somewhere, are being put in an ice slurry, taken away and processed for human consumption. Even the fish that are apparently not infected by Rickettsia and are being harvested and processed are not being tested for Rickettsia. Given that it can take up to two weeks for the symptoms of Rickettsia to present themselves and given that we know as a fact that all of the farms and all of the farm sites and all of the pens now are infected with Rickettsia, you can draw no other conclusion than the fish companies in Tasmania are selling and consumers are purchasing and eating infected fish. How on earth does that help maintain the reputation of Tasmania or the reputation of this industry? It doesn't. I make the point again—I want to labour this point—that the people that are running a protection racket for the salmon industry in Tasmania are actually going to be part of its demise. What we should be doing is coming in here and making sure we have the very best environmental safeguards possible at a federal level and pressuring the state and territory governments to make sure they have the very best environmental safeguards and that they have the very best environment protection agencies so that we can have absolute confidence we're not eating fish that died in a bacterial outbreak and looked good enough with their gills pink enough to be processed and sold at Coles or Woolies. Ms Sharkie 265980 Yuck. Mr WILKIE C2T Yuck, yes! It's gross. It's really gross. That's not as gross, believe it or not, as the images I'm sure some honourable members have seen of the beaches on the east coast in Tasmania and on Bruny Island in recent weeks with rotting fish carcasses and globules of fish oil—up on the beaches, which the Tasmania government said are completely safe. 'The water is clean, and the beaches are fine, but do not touch the fish.' Do these people know how silly they look? It would be funny except it's so serious. It's serious insofar as ensuring the industry is sustainable. It's serious insofar as ensuring the environment is protected and safe. And it's serious when it comes to the very pointed matter here tonight of the extinction crisis. This is the context in which we're saying: 'The fish farms can stay in Macquarie Harbour,' and the government and—I don't know—I think the opposition are saying that they don't give two hoots about one of the planet's oldest species becoming extinct. Why is all this happening? Why are the government and the opposition acting so patently at odds with the best interests of the natural environment, and of a threatened species in particular, and so at odds with the public interest, so at odds with the groundswell of discontent on the backbench and so at odds with having the best reputation for the industry in the future? It is for one reason: to harvest a few hundred votes in the electorate of Braddon. It is that crude, that blunt and that ugly. The government is happy—well, it is prepared, I should say—to drive the Maugean skate to extinction because it might improve its chances of winning the Tasmanian north-west and west coast seat of Braddon. When you think about it in that context, it's all the more ugly. I suppose the government might hope there's some benefit in the seat of Franklin and in the seat of Lyons, both of which also have fish farms. But, oh, the irony of it! The member for Franklin is the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, and the Tassal factory has a lot of Huon aquaculture farms down the channel and down the Huon River. Oh, the irony of it! That minister is going to be in here voting in favour of this, even though it is actually hastening the demise of the industry by the trashing of the industry's reputation. I struggled to get my head around this. For one seat—which, by the way, Labor has almost no chance of winning, so the whole exercise becomes even more ludicrous—they're taking a species closer to the edge of extinction. They are annoying the majority of Tasmanians who want fish farms kicked out of Macquarie Harbour, all to chase some votes that ultimately won't see them win the seat anyway. It's just bizarre behaviour. It's just crazy behaviour. It's inexplicable, but that's what raw politics is like. To echo my colleagues behind me, it helps to explain why the primary vote of the major parties is collapsing and why, at this federal election, again, a third or more of the country will vote for someone else. They will vote for people who will fight for the environment, fight for the public interest, fight for their communities, fight for rational policies to grow industries, not to kill them. I hold out some hope that the opposition will oppose this bill, probably for their own self-serving interests by trying to trip up the Labor Party before the election. But I don't care what their motivation is. I just hope they oppose it and vote against it. 17:38 Dr WEBSTER 281688 Mallee In my limited time I want to tell you what Labor is doing to regional Australia through the words of a constituent of mine, Kate Vance of Landsborough West. Kate came up to me at the Wimmera field days recently. By her own admission, she isn't political. It was only when she opened her mouth to speak to me that she broke down in tears with her children at her side. It was when Kate, a deep thinker, actually verbalised the impact of Labor's railroading of regional communities for its dystopian vision of the nation that the tears started flowing. This is what she had to say: I do not wish to take sides in the renewable debate. I believe most people, rightly or wrongly, make the best decisions they can. I can speak only for what my own lived experience has been, viewed through the eyes of my passion which is health. I have experienced within myself, and witnessed in my family, my friends, and my community the mental anguish that is becoming synonymous with renewable energy. The political paraphernalia sold to those in the city is peppered with catch-cries of saving the planet, but at present, this seems to be at any expense to the wellbeing of the people. Are the people not the planet too? The structure of the current system allows private companies to approach landholders, encourage them to make life-changing decisions, and then have them sign confidentiality agreements preventing them from discussing these decisions with close family, friends, or neighbours. This is not nurturing the mental health of rural people. She goes on: How on earth did I allow myself to be controlled to the point where I cried alone for weeks because I felt I couldn't speak to my own parents about the sale of a neighbouring farm that belonged to my own family? I had a basic human need to talk to the people I love and a piece of paper prevented me from feeling worthy enough to do so. She goes on: The microtrauma of the constant presence of ever-encroaching infrastructure involving regular and unpaid interactions with paid liaison personnel is draining and costly. We know that trauma has lasting effects. What is happening below the surface that we are yet to see in a measurable health sense in rural areas? She goes on: The government spends millions of dollars on mental health campaigns encouraging people to ask one another "are you okay?", and yet when the farming community is crying out—in the best voice they know how—that they are very much not okay, the response has been to treat them like dangerous extremists. This hurtful hypocrisy, and the emotions that flare as a consequence, are polarizing and dividing our communities. Kate says: I have sat in community groups where people are too afraid to even consider applying for windfarm grants because of the potential for angry divide amongst the people they are trying to represent. Some groups would simply rather have no money. I want to be able to exist in my local area where people are free to speak openly and honestly about the things affecting them and their families. Suppression of truth always has a cost somewhere. The suicide statistics of farmers suggest this is one population that has nothing left to cover that cost. She says: I have witnessed good people on both sides of the debate forget their most basic human kindnesses in the midst of all of this. Is this really who we are? This behaviour is not a reflection of what has bonded rural communities together over a long time. We have become what we are by supporting one another through hardships, and banding together in the toughest of times. I continue to see the most incredible advocacy and a beauty in unity that perhaps some of rural Australia has never before known. But I have also been present in a roomful of angry people and wondered if some of those bearing the brunt of this public vitriol felt as sick as they looked, only to eventually realise I was the one feeling sick. I have hated seeing and hearing people turning on one another in desperation and divisional defence of their own positions. We all need each other right now. We need one another's kindness more than ever. We need one another's respect. We need to value ourselves and our communities, no matter what is happening around us. I have needed to hear myself acknowledge that no matter how much understanding I have shown for the process of what is happening, there have been times when I was very far from okay. I think the collective voice that many farmers are not happy has been heard. There are also some very happy farmers who have been public in their support for what is happening and appear, at face value, to genuinely believe renewable energy infrastructure has placed them, their families, and their farms and businesses in a better position. But how many people, like me, have cried alone feeling like they were cut off from their support people by a rollout binding them to dealing with life-changing decisions in lonely and isolating circumstances? … Thank you … The DEPUTY SPEAKER E0D In accordance with the resolution agreed to earlier, the time for the debate has expired. The SPEAKER 53517 The question before the House is that the second reading amendment moved by the honourable member for Brisbane be agreed to.  

The House divided. [17:49]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

 12 AYES Bandt, A. P. Bates, S. J. (Teller) Chandler-Mather, M. (Teller) Chaney, K. E. Daniel, Z. Ryan, M. M. Scamps, S. A. Sharkie, R. C. C. Steggall, Z. Tink, K. J. Watson-Brown, E. Wilkie, A. D. 76 NOES Albanese, A. N. 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. Conroy, P. M. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. Fernando, C. Freelander, M. R. Garland, C. M. L. Gee, A. R. Georganas, S. Giles, A. J. Gillespie, D. A. Goodenough, I. R. 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, 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. 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. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thwaites, K. L. Vamvakinou, M. van Manen, A. J. Vasta, R. X. Watts, T. G. Webster, A. E. Wells, A. S. Wilson, J. H. Wood, J. P. Zappia, A. 0 PAIRS

Question negatived.

 17:58 The SPEAKER 53517 The question before the House is that the second reading amendment moved by the honourable member for Fairfax be agreed to.  

The House divided. [17:58]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

 50 AYES 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. 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. Leeser, J. Marino, N. B. McCormack, M. F. McIntosh, M. I. McKenzie, Z. A. O'Brien, E. L. O'Brien, L. S. Pasin, A. Pearce, G. B. Pike, H. J. Price, M. L. Ramsey, R. E. (Teller) Stevens, J. Sukkar, M. S. Tehan, D. T. Thompson, P. van Manen, A. J. Vasta, R. X. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Ware, J. L. Webster, A. E. Willcox, A. J. Wilson, R. J. Wolahan, K. Wood, J. P. Young, T. J. 84 NOES Albanese, A. N. 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. Daniel, Z. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. Fernando, C. Freelander, M. R. Garland, C. M. L. Georganas, S. Giles, A. J. Gorman, P. Gosling, L. J. 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. Marles, R. D. Mascarenhas, Z. F. A. McBain, K. L. McBride, E. M. Miller-Frost, L. J. Mitchell, B. K. Mitchell, R. G. Mulino, D. Neumann, S. K. O'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. 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. Tink, K. J. Vamvakinou, M. Watson-Brown, E. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. Wilkie, A. D. Wilson, J. H. Zappia, A. 0 PAIRS

Question negatived.

 18:05 The SPEAKER 53517 The question is that the bill be read a second time.  

The House divided. [18:05]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

 111 AYES Albanese, A. N. Aly, A. Ananda-Rajah, M. Andrews, K. L. Bell, A. M. Belyea, J. A. Bowen, C. E. Burke, A. S. Burnell, M. P. Burney, L. J. Burns, J. Butler, M. C. Byrnes, A. J. Caldwell, C. M. Charlton, A. H. G. Chesters, L. M. Clare, J. D. Claydon, S. C. Coker, E. A. Coleman, D. B. Collins, J. M. Conroy, P. M. Coulton, M. M. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. Fernando, C. Fletcher, P. W. Freelander, M. R. Garland, C. M. L. Gee, A. R. Georganas, S. Giles, A. J. Gillespie, D. A. Goodenough, I. R. Gorman, P. Gosling, L. J. Hastie, A. W. Hill, J. C. Howarth, L. R. Husic, E. N. Jones, S. P. Joyce, B. T. G. Kearney, G. M. Keogh, M. J. Khalil, P. King, C. F. King, M. M. H. Landry, M. L. Lawrence, T. N. Laxale, J. A. A. Leeser, J. Leigh, A. K. Lim, S. B. C. Marino, N. B. Marles, R. D. Mascarenhas, Z. F. A. McBain, K. L. McBride, E. M. McCormack, M. F. McIntosh, M. I. McKenzie, Z. A. Miller-Frost, L. J. Mitchell, B. K. Mitchell, R. G. Mulino, D. Neumann, S. K. O'Brien, E. L. O'Connor, B. P. J. O'Neil, C. E. Pasin, A. Payne, A. E. Perrett, G. D. Phillips, F. E. Pike, H. J. Plibersek, T. J. Price, M. L. Rae, S. T. Ramsey, R. E. Reid, G. J. Repacholi, D. P. Rishworth, A. L. Roberts, T. G. Rowland, M. A. Ryan, J. C. Scrymgour, M. R. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Stevens, J. Sukkar, M. S. Swanson, M. J. Tehan, D. T. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thompson, P. Thwaites, K. L. Vamvakinou, M. van Manen, A. J. Vasta, R. X. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Ware, J. L. Watts, T. G. Webster, A. E. Wells, A. S. Willcox, A. J. Wilson, J. H. Wood, J. P. Young, T. J. Zappia, A. 14 NOES Bandt, A. P. Bates, S. J. Chandler-Mather, M. Chaney, K. E. (Teller) Daniel, Z. Haines, H. M. Ryan, M. M. Scamps, S. A. Sharkie, R. C. C. Spender, A. M. Steggall, Z. Tink, K. J. Watson-Brown, E. Wilkie, A. D. (Teller) 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.
Bill read a second time.

 Third Reading 61 18:11 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney I move: That this bill be now read a third time. The SPEAKER 53517 The question before the House is that the bill be now read a third time.  

The House divided. [18:12]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

 111 AYES Albanese, A. N. Aly, A. Ananda-Rajah, M. Andrews, K. L. Bell, A. M. Belyea, J. A. Bowen, C. E. Burke, A. S. Burnell, M. P. Burney, L. J. Burns, J. Butler, M. C. Byrnes, A. J. Caldwell, C. M. Charlton, A. H. G. Chesters, L. M. Clare, J. D. Claydon, S. C. Coker, E. A. Coleman, D. B. Collins, J. M. Conroy, P. M. Coulton, M. M. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. Fernando, C. Fletcher, P. W. Freelander, M. R. Garland, C. M. L. Gee, A. R. Georganas, S. Giles, A. J. Gillespie, D. A. Goodenough, I. R. Gorman, P. Gosling, L. J. Hastie, A. W. Hill, J. C. Howarth, L. R. Husic, E. N. Jones, S. P. Joyce, B. T. G. Kearney, G. M. Keogh, M. J. Khalil, P. King, C. F. King, M. M. H. Landry, M. L. Lawrence, T. N. Laxale, J. A. A. Leeser, J. Leigh, A. K. Lim, S. B. C. Marino, N. B. Marles, R. D. Mascarenhas, Z. F. A. McBain, K. L. McBride, E. M. McCormack, M. F. McIntosh, M. I. McKenzie, Z. A. Miller-Frost, L. J. Mitchell, B. K. Mitchell, R. G. Mulino, D. Neumann, S. K. O'Brien, E. L. O'Connor, B. P. J. O'Neil, C. E. Pasin, A. Payne, A. E. Perrett, G. D. Phillips, F. E. Pike, H. J. Plibersek, T. J. Price, M. L. Rae, S. T. Ramsey, R. E. Reid, G. J. Repacholi, D. P. Rishworth, A. L. Roberts, T. G. Rowland, M. A. Ryan, J. C. Scrymgour, M. R. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Stevens, J. Sukkar, M. S. Swanson, M. J. Tehan, D. T. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thompson, P. Thwaites, K. L. Vamvakinou, M. van Manen, A. J. Vasta, R. X. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Ware, J. L. Watts, T. G. Webster, A. E. Wells, A. S. Willcox, A. J. Wilson, J. H. Wood, J. P. Young, T. J. Zappia, A. 14 NOES Bandt, A. P. Bates, S. J. Chandler-Mather, M. Chaney, K. E. (Teller) Daniel, Z. Haines, H. M. Ryan, M. M. Scamps, S. A. Sharkie, R. C. C. Spender, A. M. Steggall, Z. Tink, K. J. Watson-Brown, E. Wilkie, A. D. (Teller) 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.
Bill read a third time.

COMMITTEES 62 COMMITTEES Public Accounts and Audit Joint Committee 62 18:14 Ms BURNEY 8GH Barton I wish to make a statement on behalf of the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit concerning the draft budget estimates for the Australian National Audit Office and the Parliamentary Budget Office for 2025-26. On behalf of the committee, I present this statement on the draft budget estimates of the Australian National Audit Office, the ANAO, and the Parliamentary Budget Office, the PBO. The committee is required, under the Public Accounts and Audit Committee Act 1951 and the Parliamentary Service Act 1999 to consider the draft budget estimates of the ANAO and the PBO, respectively, and to make recommendations regarding these estimates to both houses of parliament. The statement on behalf of the committee, in advance of the budget being handed down, is an important transparency measure that informs the parliament and the public on the adequacy of the resourcing of the ANAO and the PBO. The committee considers both offices vital in supporting the work of this parliament and strengthening integrity and transparency in public administration. The committee has carefully scrutinised the ANAO's and the PBO's draft budget estimates for 2025-26 and has resolved to endorse them subject to further review of the costings and final estimates, which may be agreed with the Department of Finance. The committee is advising that additional funding of $96.1 million is being sought by the ANAO over the forward estimates, requiring an ongoing funding increase of $24.9 million per year. The Auditor-General has also indicated to the committee in a recent update that the ANAO expects to run an operating loss of approximately $6.1 million in 2024-25, similar to the loss of $6 million ANAO incurred in 2023-24. The ANAO's request for increased funding is fully supported by the committee, which regards it as critical in ensuring the future accountability, transparency, efficiency and effectiveness of the expenditure of the Australian taxpayer's money. The committee has been concerned, over many successive parliamentary terms, by the unsustainability of the ANAO's long-term financial position and the risk that this poses to the operational independence and its ability to effectively perform its vital statutory roles. The current funding model for the ANAO is simply not sustainable due to the continuing and growing cost pressures it is facing from increasingly more expensive financial statement audits, essential technological upgrades and increased compliance for regulatory demand. The efficiency dividend has made a significant impact, also, on ANAO and has been a principal driver of its prior supplementary funding request. ANAO has advised the committee that, if the efficiency dividend had not been applied, its appropriation would have been $104 million in 2024-25, an increase of $28.6 million. The committee's considered view is that making these funds available for other executive functions is having an entirely opposite effect on the efficiency dividend's intended purpose, because it is endangering the even greater savings for the taxpayer through effective auditing. The committee has supported the removal of the efficiency dividend from ANAO for many years and continues to urge the government to do so. Another impact of the funding constraints faced by the ANAO is a reduction in the number of performance audits that it can perform. The committee recommended in 2022, in its review of the Auditor-General Act 1997, that 48 discretionary performance audits should be performed by the ANAO each financial year to ensure proper oversight of public expenditure. The Auditor-General has recently advised the committee, however, that to appropriately target the ANAO's available resources in the areas of highest priority, he now expects the ANAO to deliver 44 performance audits in 2024-25, to decline to between 38 and 42 performance audits in 2025-26 and the forward years. The inability of the ANAO to deliver a full work program due to funding constraints is of serious concern to the committee, as it undermines the future of robust audit functions for the Commonwealth that can foster and drive efficiency and effectiveness throughout the public sector. The ANAO has proposed that the committee request it to develop models for a more sustainable funding approach for the 2026-27 budget. The committee is supportive of this approach and anticipates that it will go forward in the next parliament. Just briefly, on the Parliamentary Budget Office: the committee has continued to be actively engaged in the budget process in relation to the PBO, and endorses the 2025-26 budget proposals. The PBO is requesting additional ongoing funding of $1.4 million a year, amounting to $5.8 million over four years, so that eight additional staff can be employed to undertake modelling and analysis. This will enable the PBO to sustainably meet the increased demand for its services by parliamentarians and parliamentary committees. The PBO is also requesting an indexation of its additional election-year funding, so that it increases from $500,000 at present to $712,000 for 2027-28. This will enable the PBO to increase its recruitment of additional staff in an election year from four to six. Finally, the PBO is requesting an equity injection of $6 million to support its independence by reinstating a now-almost-depleted financial buffer of the same amount given to the PBO under its establishment in 2012. This has been supported by the committee in the past and will be a crucial resource to enable the PBO to manage risks to its operational independence, mitigate unexpected or unanticipated budget pressures and meet future needs of data models and technology uplifts. It is clear to the committee that, without these additional funds, the PBO may not be able to adequately perform many of the services that have become so valued and essential to parliamentarians. This includes timely responses to the ever-increasing number of requests for costing analysis, the needed expansion of the PBO's budget-visualisation and self-help interactive tools, and meeting an increased governance compliance burden. The JCPAA confirms its continuing support for the PBO and its role in providing valuable information and analysis to all parliamentarians to better inform public debate. I thank the Auditor-General and the Parliamentary Budget Office for their work in support of the parliament and the JCPAA. I also thank the deputy chair and my fellow committee members for their thoughtful and detailed consideration of these budget requests. I ask leave of the House to present a copy of my statement and the executive minutes or reports to the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit. Leave granted. Ms BURNEY 8GH I present a copy of my statement and the executive minutes or reports 500, 503, 504, 505 and 506 of the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit. The SPEAKER 53517 I thank the member for Barton. Sitting suspended from 18:24 to 19:31 BILLS 64 BILLS Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026 64

Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026

First Reading 64 Second Reading 64 19:32 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin I move: That this bill be now read a second time. And I acknowledge the Ngunnawal people here, and the Yagara and Yugambeh back home. This budget builds on the progress that we have made, together. It's a plan to help with the cost of living. With two new tax cuts, and higher wages. More bulk-billing, and more help with electricity bills. Cheaper medicine, and less student debt. And it's a plan to build Australia's future. With more homes. New investments in skills and education. Competition reforms, and a Future Made in Australia. Our economy is turning the corner. Inflation is down, incomes are rising, unemployment is low, interest rates are coming down, debt is down, and growth is picking up momentum. On all these fronts, our economy and our budget are in better shape than they were three years ago. This progress has been exceptional, but not accidental. The credit belongs to Australians in every corner of our country. We've come a long way, but there is more work to do. This budget is our plan for a new generation of prosperity in a new world of uncertainty. It's a plan to help finish the fight against inflation. Rebuild living standards. And maximise our national advantages into the future. This is a responsible budget with five main priorities: Helping with the cost-of-living; Strengthening Medicare; Building more homes; Investing in every stage of education; and Making our economy stronger, more productive and more resilient. Economic o utlook The global economy is volatile and unpredictable. The 2020s have already seen a global pandemic, global inflation and now the threat of a global trade war. The whole world has changed as a consequence. Tariffs and tensions abroad have been accompanied by storms here at home. Ex-Tropical Cyclone Alfred could wipe a quarter of a percentage point off quarterly growth. North and Far North Queensland have flooded too. Storm clouds are gathering in the global economy as well. Trade disruptions are rising, China's growth is slowing, war is still raging in Europe, and a ceasefire in the Middle East is breaking down. Treasury expects the global economy to grow 3¼ per cent for the next three years—its slowest since the 1990s. It's already forecasting the two biggest economies in the world will slow next year—with risks weighing more heavily on both. Australia is neither uniquely impacted nor immune from these pressures, but we are among the best placed to navigate them. We're emerging from this spike in global inflation in better shape than almost any other advanced economy. Growth is forecast to pick up from 1½ per cent this year to 2½ per cent in 2026-27. The private sector is resuming its rightful place as the main driver of this growth, with Treasury upgrading forecasts for growth in private demand to more than double next year, compared to this one. Unemployment is now projected to peak lower, at 4¼ per cent. Employment and real wage growth this year will be stronger, and participation will stay near its record high for longer. Inflation is coming down faster as well. Treasury now expects inflation to be sustainably back in the band six months earlier than anticipated. Now, all of this means that the soft landing we have been planning for and preparing for is now looking more and more likely. Because of our collective efforts, the worst is behind us and the economy is now heading in the right direction. Delivering r esponsible c ost- o f- l iving r elief But there's more work to do because we know that people are still under pressure. The cost of living is front of mind for most Australians and it is front and centre in this budget. We know the welcome improvements in the aggregate numbers don't always immediately translate to how people are feeling and faring. We've made a lot of progress together but we know many people are still doing it tough. Our plan to rebuild living standards starts with cost-of-living help and wages growth. It includes more hip-pocket help for households: Two new tax cuts for every taxpayer; More energy bill relief; Increasing wages and reforming non-compete clauses; More bulk-billing and cheaper medicines; Student debt relief; and A fair go for families at the checkout and for farmers at the farm gate. New tax cuts for every Australian taxpayer Tonight, the government is proud to be delivering more tax relief. Every Australian taxpayer will get a tax cut next year and the year after, to top-up the tax cuts which began in July. This will take the first tax rate down to its lowest level in more than half a century. These additional tax cuts are modest but they will make a difference. The average earner will have an extra $536 in their pocket each year when they're fully implemented. Combined with our first round of tax cuts, this is $2,190. And the average total tax cut will be $2,548, or about $50 a week. We'll also increase the Medicare levy low-income thresholds, which is extra tax relief for more than a million Australians. Now, our $17 billion in tax cuts are the biggest part of the responsible cost-of-living package in this budget. But they're not the only part. New energy rebates Electricity prices, in the official data, went down 25 per cent last year but they're still putting pressure on households around the world. Two rounds of energy rebates have helped take some of the sting out of energy costs. Tonight, we're providing $1.8 billion in energy bill relief. Every household and around one million small businesses will receive energy rebates until the end of 2025. This means cutting another $150 off bills this year. The government will also be using the powers and penalties of the energy regulators and the ACCC to help ensure: Energy companies offer customers cheaper deals; Pensioners receive the discounts they are entitled to; and Australians get the value that they deserve. Earning more and keeping more At the core of our economic plan—and at the very heart of this Labor government—is a simple objective: To ensure more Australians earn more and keep more of what they earn. In the five quarters before our first budget, real wages fell in annual terms. They have now grown for the last five. Real incomes per capita are now growing too. This is the dividend of our economic plan to get inflation down, wages up, and tax cuts flowing. Tonight, we're providing an additional $2.6 billion to fund pay rises for aged-care nurses from March this year— So that the workers that we trust to care for our parents and grandparents get paid properly for the work that they do. We're reforming non-compete clauses, to lift wages by up to $2,500 a year for workers covered by them. We've supported a historic wage increase for the early childhood educators and care workforce. And we've backed pay rises which ensure the national minimum wage has risen by almost $7,500 a year. A fair go for families and farmers We know that Australians, despite all of this, are still under pressure, and a lot of that pressure is felt at the checkout. That's why we're cracking down on the supermarkets. By empowering the competition watchdog, making the Food and Grocery Code mandatory, increasing penalties and boosting competition. At the same time, we're targeting excessive surcharging and scams and unfair trading practices that harm consumers. Cutting student debt A university education is a life-changing opportunity. But it shouldn't leave Australians with a lifetime of debt. This year, we will cut 20 per cent off all student loan debts, raise the minimum repayment threshold and reduce repayment rates. Combined with our existing student debt relief, we will slash $19 billion in debt for more than three million Australians. Cheaper medicines In every budget, including this one, we have made medicines cheaper. Tonight, we reduce the maximum price for a PBS script from $31.60 to $25. Pensioners and concession cardholders will still pay $7.70 a script, because we froze their costs as well. We're also investing $1.8 billion to list more life-changing and life-saving medicines on the PBS. For example, cutting the cost of a lymphoma treatment will save some Australians more than $600,000. Strengthening Medicare The Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme is a great Labor creation—and it's a great Australian institution. We are strengthening it because Australians need us to, not weakening it because American multinationals want us to. A Labor government created Medicare as well—and only Labor governments strengthen it. Tonight, we are proud to make the single biggest commitment to Medicare since its creation. A record $8½ billion to lift bulk-billing rates and build our health workforce. Because of this investment, nine out of 10 GP visits should be fully bulk-billed by the end of the decade. More bulk-billing will mean less pressure on families. These incentives mean there'll be around 4,800 fully bulk-billing practices around the country— Making it easier to see a doctor and get the care you need. And saving patients around $860 million a year. This budget also delivers new incentives for doctors to train as GPs— New scholarships for nurses and midwives— Better access to urgent care clinics And another 50 Medicare urgent care clinics. This is a $644 million investment in this budget to build on the 87 urgent care clinics that we've already opened. Four in every five Australians will live within a 20-minute drive of an urgent care clinic as a consequence. Opening early, closing late—available on weekends. Taking pressure off hospitals and emergency departments. And all you need is your Medicare card. More funding for public hospitals Every single state and territory will also get more money for hospitals in this budget. Funding that will reduce waiting times. Tonight, we're locking in an extra $1.8 billion, taking our total contribution to public hospitals to $33.9 billion next year. Investing in women's health We're proud to be investing $793 million in this budget in women's health. To create more choices, lower costs and deliver better health care for women. This funding will help Australian women save on contraception, access more endometriosis and pelvic pain clinics, and receive better support throughout menopause. Because, for our government, women's health is not a boutique issue or a question of special interest—it is a national priority. Building more homes for Australians New plans for cost of living and health are accompanied by new investments in housing. We are tackling the housing shortage from every responsible angle. Making homeownership more affordable for young Australians and for young families in particular. Our $33 billion plan will help build 1.2 million new homes before the decade is out. More homes, more quickly This includes $54 million to accelerate the uptake of modern methods of housing construction. Which is all about building more homes, more quickly. It supports our work to cut red tape and reduce financial barriers to more efficient construction methods. The first two rounds of the $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund are helping to build about 18,000 social and affordable homes for those who need them most. And lifting the cap on Housing Australia's financial liabilities to $26 billion also helps in this regard. We're making sure new properties are well located and connected to the infrastructure that they require. Our Housing Support Program is funding the crucial roads, water and power that these new homes need. Our national leadership is incentivising states and territories to reform their planning systems to accelerate new housing supply. And, to build more, we know that we also need to train more builders. That's why we're attracting more apprentices into the housing industry. By doubling incentive payments so that eligible apprentices get up to $10,000 if they train up in the housing construction sector. More support for first home buyers Tonight, we're expanding our Help to Buy scheme as well. This is part of our efforts to help ensure more Australians can buy a place of their own. We will update the property price and income caps so more first home buyers are eligible for the scheme, and this will help 40,000 Australians buy their first home in the next four years. And the changes mean that they can access a bigger range of homes and buy one that suits them. And we're easing pressure on the housing market by banning foreign investors from buying established homes, and cracking down on foreign land banking as well. Investing in every stage of education A crucial part of this Labor government's economic plan relies on the transformational power of education. Its power to turn aspiration and ambition into reality. This is why we're investing in every stage of education. To lay the foundation for a better and fairer system and teach and train Australians for the jobs of the future. Reforming early education and care This all starts with early childhood education and care. We believe every child has the right to an early education, to ensure that they don't start school behind. Cheaper child care is also cost-of-living relief with an economic dividend. A key part of our plan to rebuild living standards is to help people work more and earn more if they want to. That means breaking down the barriers to workforce participation. So, from January 2026, we are replacing the childcare subsidy activity test with a new three-day guarantee. This will make sure families are entitled to at least three days a week of subsidised early childhood education and care. We're also building more childcare centres in areas of need. Investing $5 billion to expand access across the country and lift the wages of early educators. And charting a path to universal early education and care, regardless of a child's background, no matter where they live. Investing in public schools We're also putting billions into public schools in this budget, to open the doors of opportunity for more Australian children. We're fully and fairly funding public schools to help students catch up, keep up and finish school. This means public schools will finally be on track to reach the funding standard recommended in the Gonski review almost 15 years ago. Making f ree TAFE permanent On top of this, our fee-free TAFE program will help equip Australians for the jobs of the future. Over the next decade, nine out of 10 new jobs will require postsecondary qualifications. Almost half of these will be from vocational training. We have introduced legislation to lock in 100,000 free TAFE places annually from 2027. And we've committed $1.6 billion to fund these places until 2035, to make it easier for Australians to train, retrain and upskill. B uilding a stronger economy We see this as an important way, or one way, to ensure Australians can be primary beneficiaries of all of this churn and change that we're seeing around the world. Another is by investing in our comparative advantages. Or by looking for opportunities to join with our partners in new, more resilient global supply chains. By becoming an indispensable part of the global net zero economy. By preparing our people to adjust to and succeed in the new world being created right in front of us. By building a future made in Australia. A more productive, more dynamic economy A big part of this depends on boosting productivity the right way, to lift living standards over the long term.    Our plan for productivity growth doesn't mean making Australians work longer for less. It's about investing in our people and doing more to unlock our potential by boosting dynamism and competition in our economy. We've created a $900 million fund to reward state governments for implementing reforms that promote competition. Tonight, we are advancing this substantial economic reform agenda. We will abolish non-compete clauses for most Australian workers. Non-competes are holding too many Australians back from switching to better, higher paying jobs. More than three million Australians are captured by these clauses, including childcare workers, construction workers and hairdressers. People shouldn't need to hire a lawyer to take the next step in their career. Or permission from their old boss if they want to be their own boss and turn an idea into a small business. The Productivity Commission estimates that this reform could lift productivity, reduce inflation and improve GDP by $5 billion. And it could boost wages by up to four per cent. We're also introducing a national licensing scheme to allow electricians to work seamlessly across borders. This will be a template for expanding national licensing to other occupations, when and where we can. The PC suggests these broader licensing reforms could boost GDP by up to $10.3 billion. A Future Made in Australia Australia is well placed to respond to the five seismic challenges shaping this new world of uncertainty. The shift from globalisation to fragmentation. From hydrocarbons to renewables. From information technology to AI. From a younger population to an older one. And all of the changes in our industrial base. All of this puts a premium on resilience. That's what a future made in Australia is all about. In this budget, we're investing more than $3 billion to support the production of Australian-made green metals, like aluminium and iron. Building on the tax incentives for critical minerals and green hydrogen that we legislated last year. We're also backing clean technologies through our Future Made in Australia Innovation Fund and by recapitalising the Clean Energy Finance Corporation. This will help develop new industries in clean energy manufacturing, green metals and low-carbon liquid fuels, and unlock more private investment. This agenda is about recognising that our future growth prospects lie at the intersection of our industrial, resources, skills and energy bases and our attractiveness as an investment destination. So that we can grasp the jobs and opportunities of the net zero transformation. Support for local businesses In difficult conditions, around 25,000 new businesses have been created each month on average since we came to office. We respect and admire the hard work, aspiration and sacrifice behind those record numbers. Which is why we're going in to bat for small and local businesses in this budget: Protecting them from unfair trading practices; Funding our Buy Australian campaign to support local producers; Providing new resources for the regulator to level the playing field for smaller players; And delivering tax relief for hospitality venues, brewers, distillers and wine producers as well. Thriving cities, suburbs and regions Building Australia's future also means building on the strength of our regions. That's why we're securing banking services in country towns and flights in the bush. It's also why we're investing up to $3 billion in additional equity to complete the rollout of the National Broadband Network. Infrastructure like the NBN is essential for communities, students and businesses, and to the productivity of our nation. So are the roads and railways connecting our regions to our cities and supporting economic growth. This budget provides $17.1 billion over 10 years for these projects. Including: $7.2 billion to upgrade the Bruce Highway in Queensland—the biggest ever investment in the Bruce. $2.3 billion for Western Sydney, with $1 billion of that for the rail network alone. And $2 billion towards transforming Sunshine Station, taking our Melbourne Airport Rail investments to $7 billion. In total we're investing more than $120 billion in infrastructure in every state and territory over the decade. Improving the productivity, resilience, liveability and sustainability of our cities, regions and communities. Accompanied by $262 million to preserve and conserve our natural land and ocean assets. Securing Australia's place in the world In these uncertain times, economic security and national security are increasingly intertwined. We're supporting stability and prosperity in our region, by helping to shore up banking services in the Pacific. We have invested an extra $50.3 billion in defence by the mid-2030s, to help keep Australians safe. It means defence funding will grow beyond 2.3 per cent of GDP by the early 2030s. And we're investing $45 million in our initial response to the 2024 Independent Intelligence Review. Responsible e conomic m anagement In a tight budget, we've made room to boost our defences, strengthen Medicare, help people doing it tough, build more homes and invest in the future. We've done all this at the same time as we've overseen the biggest ever fiscal improvement in a single term of government. Tonight's budget is $207 billion better than we inherited. It's in better shape in every year over the forward estimates than it was three years ago. In our first two years, we posted the first back-to-back surpluses in nearly two decades. Our deficit this year has almost halved since we came to office. Next year's deficit is $42 billion, lower than what was forecast at the last election, and lower than at the mid-year update. Gross debt will hit $940 billion this financial year, $177 billion less than what we inherited. This means we will avoid around $60 billion in interest costs over the decade. These are some of the dividends of our responsible economic management. Achieved through a combination of spending restraint, finding savings and banking revenue upgrades. Real payments growth is forecast to average 1.7 per cent to 2028-29, less than half of the average under our predecessors. We have found around $94 billion of savings since coming to government, including another $2 billion in this budget. In this term, we've banked around 70 per cent of tax receipt upgrades. And we've made structural improvements to the budget across the NDIS, aged care and interest costs. Broadening o pportunity We're repairing the budget without ignoring our responsibility to build a stronger, fairer and more inclusive society. Where more Australians have the chance to contribute to and share in our economic success. We're providing $1.3 billion for Closing the Gap and economic self-determination for First Nations Australians. With investments in remote community services, opportunities for business, and support for homeownership. Tonight's budget also includes $424 million for Australians with a disability, and more funding for aged-care reform. There's more money to support veterans and build on the progress that we have made eliminating the backlog of claims. Cyclone Alfred And we're providing help to Australians and communities affected by natural disasters. Provisioning another $1.2 billion to properly fund recovery from ex-Tropical Cyclone Alfred. As part of $13.5 billion in natural disaster funding for further north and around the country. Seizing t he o pportunities a head It's even more important and even more remarkable that Australia's economy is turning the corner. When we know that the global economy is taking a turn for the worse. Our progress and our prospects validate and vindicate the decisions and sacrifices that we've made together as Australians. To bring inflation and debt down. To get wages and growth up. And to keep unemployment low. What really matters is that we build on this platform. How we help finish the fight against inflation. How we keep rebuilding living standards. And how we maximise our national advantages to benefit Middle Australia. The plan at the core of this budget is about more than putting the worst behind us. It's about seizing the best of what's ahead of us. To build a stronger economy together. And to build a future that we can all be proud of. That's why I commend this bill and this budget to the House. Debate adjourned. BUDGET 71 BUDGET Documents 71 20:01 Mr JONES A9B Whitlam For the information of honourable members, I present the following documents in connection with the budget for 2025-26: Budget strategy and outlook—Budget paper No. 1—2025-26. Budget measures—Budget paper No. 2—2025-26. Federal financial relations—Budget paper No. 3—2025-26. Agency resourcing—Budget paper No. 4—2025-26. Documents made parliamentary papers. MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS 72 MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS Budget 72 20:01 Mr JONES A9B Whitlam I present the following ministerial statements: Women's budget statement 2025-26 and the Regional ministerial budget statement 2025-26—Building regional Australia's future. BILLS 72 BILLS Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2025-2026 72

Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2025-2026

First Reading 72 Second Reading 72 20:02 Mr JONES A9B Whitlam I move: That the bill be now read a second time. This bill, Appropriation Bill (No. 2), along with Appropriation Bill (No. 1) and the Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1), are the budget appropriation bills for 2025-26. Appropriation Bill (No. 2) seeks approval for appropriations from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of $14.6 billion. This broadly represents seven-twelfths of the estimated 2025-26 annual appropriations and provides funding for new measures announced in tonight's budget. The supply bills currently before the parliament provide for the balance of annual appropriations for 2025-26—that is funding for the first five months of 2025-26. Together with the Supply Bill (No. 2) 2025-26, this bill provides appropriations for services that are not the ordinary annual services of government for the full year of 2025-26. I now outline the most significant items provided for in this bill. First, the Department of Defence will receive close to $7.2 billion to support the implementation of the 2024 National Defence Strategy and the 2024 Integrated Investment Program, including through investments in military capability, as well as enabling ICT capabilities and infrastructure. The Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts will receive approximately $2.3 billion, including funding for Government Business Enterprises to continue to deliver projects, including the Australian Rail Track Corporation for the Inland Rail program, the NBN Co for completion of fibre upgrades, and the WSA Co for Western Sydney International (Nancy-Bird Walton) Airport. Funding will also be provided to the National Intermodal Corporation for the development of intermodal projects, and for the Roads to Recovery and Local Roads and Community Infrastructure programs. The Department of Finance will receive over $1.6 billion, including funding for Australian Naval Infrastructure Pty Ltd and the Snowy Hydro Limited construction loan. This bill also contains an advance to the Finance Minister (AFM) provision of $600 million to provide the government with the capacity to allocate additional appropriations for urgent and unforeseen expenditure during 2025-26. However, if this bill were passed along with Supply Bill (No. 2), the total allowable AFM cannot exceed the $600 million under Supply Bill (No. 2). This amount is equivalent to that which was provided in the same facility in 2024-25. Details of the proposed expenditure are set out in the schedules to the bill, the explanatory memorandum, and the portfolio budget statements tabled in relation to the supply bills and budget bills for 2025-26. I commend this bill to the chamber. Debate adjourned. Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026 72

Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026

First Reading 72 Second Reading 73 20:07 Mr JONES A9B Whitlam I know there's a lot of interest in the House at the moment on this particular bill. I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) provides for appropriations for the last seven months of the next financial year, 2025-26, for the operations of: the Department of the Senate the Department of the House of Representatives the Department of Parliamentary Services, and the Parliamentary Budget Office. The bill seeks approval for appropriations from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of $195.3 million. This broadly represents seven-twelfths—it rolls off your tongue, doesn't it—of the estimated 2025-26 annual appropriations for the parliamentary departments and provides funding for new measures announced in the 2025-26 budget tonight—the 2025-26 budget. The supply bills currently before parliament provide for the balance of annual appropriations for 2025-26—that is, funding for the first five months of 2025-26. Together with the Supply (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2025-26, this bill provides appropriations for expenditure in relation to the parliamentary departments for the full financial year, 2025-26. The most significant item in this bill is the provision of over $155 million to the Department of Parliamentary Services to support the work of the Australian parliament, through services to parliamentarians and as custodians of Parliament House. This bill also includes an advance to the responsible Presiding Officer of $1.9 million. However, if the bill were passed along with Supply (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1), moved earlier today, the total allowable advance to the responsible Presiding Officer cannot exceed the $1.9 million under the Supply (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1). This is equivalent to that which was provided in similar provisions in 2024-25. Full details of the proposed expenditure are set out in the schedule to the bill, the explanatory memorandum, and the portfolio budget statements tabled in relation to the supply bills and budget bills for 2025-26. I commend the bill to the chamber. Debate adjourned. House adjourned at 20:09 NOTICES 73 NOTICES Presentation 73