2025-07-30 3 1 0 House of Reps 0 1

Wednesday, 30 July 2025

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

COMMITTEES 1 COMMITTEES Selection Committee 1 Report 1 09:01 The SPEAKER 53517 I present report No. 1 of the Selection Committee, relating to the consideration of committee and delegation business and private members' business on Monday 25 August 2025. The report will be printed in the Hansard for today, and the committee's determinations will appear in tomorrow's Notice Paper. Copies of the report have been placed on the table. The report read as follows— Report relating to the consideration of committee and delegation business and of private Members' business 1. The Committee met in private session on Tuesday, 29 July 2025. 2. The Committee deliberated on items of committee and delegation business that had been notified, private Members' business items listed on the Notice Paper and notices lodged on Tuesday, 29 July 2025, and determined the order of precedence and times on Monday, 25 August 2025, as follows: Items for House of Representatives Chamber (10.10 am to 12 noon) PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS Notices 1 MR WILKIE: To present a Bill for an Act to amend the law relating to social security, and for related purposes. (Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Responding to Robodebt) Bill 2025) (Notice given 29 July 2025.) Presenter may speak to the second reading for a period not exceeding 10 minutes — pursuant to standing order 41. Debate must be adjourned pursuant to standing order 142. 2 MS STEGGALL: To present a Bill for an Act to establish a national climate change adaptation framework, and for related purposes. (Climate Change (National Framework for Adaptation) Bill 2025) (Notice given 29 July 2025.) Presenter may speak to the second reading for a period not exceeding 10 minutes — pursuant to standing order 41. Debate must be adjourned pursuant to standing order 142. 3 MS LE: To present a Bill for an Act to amend the Higher Education Support Act 2003, and for related purposes. (Higher Education Support Amendment (Fair Study and Opportunity) Bill 2025) (Notice given 29 July 2025.) Presenter may speak to the second reading for a period not exceeding 10 minutes — pursuant to standing order 41. Debate must be adjourned pursuant to standing order 142. 4 MR THOMPSON: To move: That this House: (1) notes: (a) National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) providers and participants will be significantly impacted and hold grave concern regarding changes to the transport allowance arrangements that have been announced in the recent annual price review, at very short notice without consultation by the Government; and (b) the feasibility for NDIS providers and participants to make the necessary adjustments to service delivery arrangements in such a short time period is not achievable and will be at the detriment of the participant; (2) condemns the Government for failing to consult with the NDIS sector and failing to understand the needs of participants and providers; and (3) calls on the Government to: (a) defer these changes for at least three months to allow for consultation and planning around the changes to service delivery that may result from these changes; and (b) explain how it expects community-based service providers in particular to adapt to these new pricing arrangements. (Notice given 23 July 2025.) Time allotted — 40 minutes. Speech time limits — Mr Thompson —5 minutes. Other Members —5 minutes each. [Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 8 x 5 mins] The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day. 5 MR ABDO: To move: That this House: (1) notes that: (a) during National Skills Week, we recognise the importance of Australia's vocational education and training (VET) sector; (b) there have been more than 650,000 enrolments in the Government's Free TAFE program; and (c) there have been more than 170,000 Free TAFE courses completed by Australians; (2) commends the Government's successful passage of the Free TAFE Bill 2024, supporting quality training and putting TAFE back at the heart of the VET sector; (3) recognises Free TAFE is helping Australians to get skills in in-demand areas like housing construction, nursing and aged care, giving Australians the skills they want, in sectors we need; and (4) supports the Government as it continues to invest in the Australian people by prioritising training initiatives like Free TAFE. (Notice given 29 July 2025.) Time allotted — remaining private Members' business time prior to 12 noon. Speech time limits — Mr Abdo —5 minutes. Other Members —5 minutes each. [Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 8 x 5 mins] The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day. Items for Federation Chamber (11 am to 1.30 pm) PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS Notices 1 MS BELL: To move: That this House: (1) notes that: (a) the Government's environment credentials are all washed up; (b) after refusing to even meet with scientists regarding the spread of toxic algal bloom in South Australia for over 18 months, the Minister for the Environment and Water has made a last minute dash in a desperate attempt to avoid scrutiny over the Government's lack of leadership on the matter; and (c) from recycling to Indigenous cultural heritage and environment protection and biodiversity conservation, the Government has failed to deliver on any of its major promises; and (2) calls on the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment and Water to attend the chamber to explain the Government's failures on the environment. (Notice given 23 July 2025.) Time allotted — 20 minutes. Speech time limits — Ms Bell —5 minutes. Other Members —5 minutes each. [Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 4 x 5 mins] The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day. 2 MS JARRETT: To move: That this House: (1) acknowledges the Government's commitment to driving economic equality for Australian women, from closing the gender pay gap and lifting wages for women, to investing in women's health and expanding paid parental leave; (2) notes that on 1 July 2025 women in Australia benefited from key changes delivered by the Government, including: (a) expanding paid parental leave to 24 weeks and paying superannuation on it; (b) lifting the minimum wage by 3.5 per cent; and (c) commencing the Commonwealth Prac Payment scheme for teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work students; and (3) welcomes the Government continuing to deliver a better future for Australian women. (Notice given 29 July 2025.) Time allotted — 40 minutes. Speech time limits — Ms Jarrett —5 minutes. Other Members —5 minutes each. [Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 8 x 5 mins] The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day. 3 MS WATSON-BROWN: To move: That this House: (1) notes that: (a) during the 2025 federal election, the then Leader of the Opposition, promised to approve Woodside's North West Shelf gas project in Western Australia within 30 days, and the Government approved it within 15 days of being sworn in; (b) the North West Shelf gas project is estimated to produce annual emissions totalling more than all of Australia's existing coal-fired power plants combined; and (c) the Government has accepted more than $1 million in donations from Woodside since 2014, making them the tenth largest donor over the last decade; and (2) calls on the Government to: (a) cancel the draft approval for Woodside's North West Shelf gas project; (b) implement a moratorium on new coal and gas projects; and (c) commit to addressing corporate influence over our political system. (Notice given 22 July 2025.) Time allotted — 15 minutes. Speech time limits — Ms Watson-Brown —5 minutes. Other Members —5 minutes each. [Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 3 x 5 mins] The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day. 4 DR GARLAND: To move: That this House: (1) acknowledges the Government's number one priority is helping Australians with the cost of living; (2) notes that on 1 July 2025, the following measures started rolling out: (a) more energy bill relief for every household with $150 off energy bills; and (b) a 30 per cent discount to home batteries to permanently cut power bills; and (3) welcomes the Government delivering the better future Australians voted for. (Notice given 23 July 2025.) Time allotted — 40 minutes. Speech time limits — Dr Garland —5 minutes. Other Members —5 minutes each. [Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 8 x 5 mins] The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day. 5 MR LEESER: To move: That this House: (1) acknowledges the passing of John Owen Stone AO on 17 July 2025; (2) notes his extensive contribution to public life, including his service as Secretary to the Treasury, and as a Senator for Queensland; (3) recognises his role in shaping policy and contributing to the national debate on issues from national economic policy and industrial relations to federalism; and (4) extends its sincere condolences to his family and pays tribute to his lifelong dedication to the Australian people. (Notice given 29 July 2025.) Time allotted — 15 minutes. Speech time limits — Mr Leeser —5 minutes. Other Members —5 minutes each. [Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 3 x 5 mins] The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day. Orders of the day 1 SMALL BUSINESS: Resumption of debate (from 28 July 2025) on the motion of Mr T Wilson—That this House: (1) acknowledges 2.5 million small businesses have been abandoned by the Government; (2) notes the Government has: (a) achieved a record number of small business insolvencies this financial year; (b) done nothing to create an environment for small businesses to thrive; and (c) made it more difficult than ever to do business in Australia; and (3) calls on the Government to prioritise the problems facing small businesses by: (a) removing excessive regulation it insists on applying to small business; (b) scrapping its plans to impose a family savings tax on unrealised capital gains; and (c) backing small business to make it easier to employ Australians. Time allotted — remaining private Members' business time prior to 1.30 pm. Speech time limits — Mr T Wilson —5 minutes. Other Members —5 minutes each. [Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 4 x 5 mins] The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day. Items for Federation Chamber (4.45 pm to 7.30 pm) PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS Notices — continued 6 MS PAYNE: To move: That this House: (1) acknowledges the Government's commitment to strengthening the paid parental leave system; (2) notes that on 1 July 2025: (a) the Government's paid parental leave increased by two weeks, from 22 weeks to 24 weeks; and (b) superannuation was added to Government paid parental leave meaning taking paid parental leave will not mean missing out on superannuation; and (3) welcomes the Government delivering the better future Australians voted for. (Notice given 23 July 2025.) Time allotted — 40 minutes. Speech time limits — Ms Payne —5 minutes. Other Members —5 minutes each. [Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 8 x 5 mins] The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day. 7 MS PRICE: To move: That this House: (1) notes: (a) that 1 July 2025 marks seven years since the official establishment of the Australian Space Agency; (b) the former Government committed more than $2 billion towards the civil space sector after the Agency's establishment, as part of our goal to triple the domestic sector to $12 billion and to create an extra 20,000 jobs by 2030; and (c) the current Government's significant cuts to Australia's space sector, including: (i) $1.2 billion from the National Space Mission for Earth Observation; (ii) $59.7 million from the Technology into Orbit program and the space flight tickets subprograms; (iii) $18 million from the Moon to Mars global supply chain facilitation; and (iv) $32.3 million slated for co-investment in space ports and launch sites; and (2) calls on the Government to reprioritise Australia's space sector, including investing in our sovereign capability. (Notice given 23 July 2025.) Time allotted — 40 minutes. Speech time limits — Ms Price —5 minutes. Other Members —5 minutes each. [Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 8 x 5 mins] The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day. 8 MS COFFEY: To move: That this House notes that: (1) to meet growing need, the Government is putting mental health at the heart of Medicare and services at the centre of communities; (2) the Government is rolling out a national network of 91 Medicare Mental Health Centres, which offer free walk-in mental health support and care from clinical and non-clinical staff, without the need for an appointment, referral, or mental health treatment plan; and (3) the Government is delivering services, closer to home, across the whole of the lifespan by opening new Perinatal Mental Health Centres, Medicare Mental Health Kids Hubs, headspace centres, and Medicare Mental Health Centres. (Notice given 29 July 2025.) Time allotted — 40 minutes. Speech time limits — Ms Coffey —5 minutes. Other Members —5 minutes each. [Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 8 x 5 mins] The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day. 9 MR WOOD: To move: That this House: (1) acknowledges the establishment and ongoing implementation of the Pacific Australia Labour Mobility (PALM) scheme, a significant bipartisan initiative designed to address chronic workforce shortages in regional and rural Australia; (2) recognises the role of the former Government in consolidating the Seasonal Worker Programme and Pacific Labour Scheme into the unified PALM scheme in 2021, streamlining Pacific labour mobility and enhancing regional cooperation; (3) notes that the PALM scheme provides a vital workforce for Australian farmers, growers, food processors, and regional businesses, particularly in horticulture, meat processing and essential services—sectors that face ongoing labour constraints; (4) further recognises the mutual benefits of the PALM scheme, delivering reliable employment and remittance opportunities to workers from nine Pacific Island nations and Timor-Leste, while strengthening Australia's diplomatic, economic, and cultural ties with our Pacific family; and (5) affirms Australia's responsibility as a regional partner, upholding its moral and regional leadership responsibility as a trusted partner in Pacific development. (Notice given 29 July 2025.) Time allotted — remaining private Members' business time prior to 7.30 pm. Speech time limits — Mr Wood —5 minutes. Other Members —5 minutes each. [Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 9 x 5 mins] The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day. THE HON D. M. DICK MP Speaker of the House of Representatives 30 July 2025 BILLS 6 BILLS National Health Amendment (Cheaper Medicines) Bill 2025 6

National Health Amendment (Cheaper Medicines) Bill 2025

First Reading 6 Second Reading 6 09:02 Mr BUTLER HWK Hindmarsh I move: That this bill be now read a second time. N ational Health A mendment (C heaper M edicines ) B ill 2025 It is a privilege to introduce the National Health Amendment (Cheaper Medicines) Bill. This bill delivers on the government's promise to deliver cheaper medicines for all Australians. Delivering cheaper medicines is one of the key pillars supporting our promise to strengthen Medicare, alongside more bulk-billing, more doctors and nurses and more urgent care clinics. Making medicines cheaper is not just good for the hip pocket, as important, obviously, as that is; it's also good for your health. This bill builds on the actions taken by the government to deliver cheaper medicines during the 47th Parliament. In July 2022, we slashed the safety net for pensioners and concession card holders with more free and cheaper medicines, sooner, with a 25 per cent reduction in the number of scripts a concessional patient must fill before the PBS safety net kicks in. That change has already delivered 73 million additional free scripts, saving pensioners over half a billion dollars. Then in January 2023, the largest cut to the cost of medicines in the history of the PBS, with the maximum cost of a general script being slashed by the government from $42.50 to just $30. Already that has saved general patients $770 million in their hip pockets. Beginning in September 2023, we finally introduced 60-day prescriptions for common medicines used on an ongoing basis—saving time and money for millions of Australians with an ongoing health condition. That has saved those Australian patients around $250 million already and allowed them to avoid around 35 million unnecessary trips to the pharmacist. In January this year we froze the cost of PBS medicines, with copayments not rising with inflation for all Australians for the first time in 25 years. Together, these four measures the government has already implemented have saved patients $1½ billion in the cost of their medicines. But we are determined to do more to make medicines even cheaper. This bill represents the fifth wave of reform to deliver cheaper medicines. As a result of the changes made by this bill, the maximum Australian general patients will pay for PBS medicines drops from $31.60 to just $25—a saving of more than 20 per cent. The last time a general patient's PBS co-payment was $25 was in 2004, over two decades ago. The amendments made by this bill will ensure that all Australians who don't hold a concession card will have access to more affordable medicines. The PBS is the primary mechanism through which the government subsidises access to prescription medicines and is a key component of Medicare, providing significant direct assistance—as much as $18 billion in 2023-24—to make medicines affordable for all Australians. The PBS represents a significant component of the Commonwealth's investment in Australia's health system. To assist in achieving sustainability of the PBS, patients contribute a co-payment towards the cost of their PBS subsidised medicine and the Commonwealth pays the remaining cost. While many PBS medicines cost significantly more than the patient contribution, the patient co-payment for the 2025 calendar year is $31.60 for general patients (that being patients who are not concessional card holders). This bill amends the National Health Act 1953 to reduce that co-payment to just $25. This allows Australians to continue to access affordable medicines which in turn will reduce the cost of living by providing a significant reduction to the general patient PBS co-payment. From 1 January next year, over 5.1 million Australians will pay less for their PBS prescriptions than they would if this bill does not pass. This commitment will provide savings to general patients of over $200 million every year, continuing to give even more savings to general patients once the 2025 one-year general patient co-payment freeze finishes at the end of this calendar year. The reduction to $25 provides immediate cost-of-living relief to patients without a concession card, while also ensuring the PBS remains a sustainable investment for government. This level of investment was selected to ensure it does not come at the expense of priorities such as: continued listings of new medicines on the PBS; investment in other essential health services, such as bulk-billing; and a competitive and sustainable pharmaceutical market. The general patient co-payment will continue to be indexed on 1 January each year in line with the existing indexation arrangements. Indexing from 1 January 2027 will be calculated off the new general co-payment amount of $25, thereby saving patients' out-of-pocket costs well into the future. This bill delivers on a significant commitment made prior to the election; it builds on earlier actions undertaken by the Albanese government to deliver cheaper medicines and it helps strengthen Medicare and improve the health of all Australians. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Strengthening Oversight of the National Intelligence Community Bill 2025 7

Strengthening Oversight of the National Intelligence Community Bill 2025

First Reading 7 Second Reading 7 09:09 Ms ROWLAND 159771 Greenway I move: That this bill be now read a second time. There is no greater responsibility for a government than keeping Australians safe. This year, the Director-General of Security delivered what he called his 'most significant, serious and sober' threat assessment of Australia's security environment to date. In the coming years, he assessed that an already challenging security environment will be characterised by threats of an increasingly varied, dynamic and unpredictable nature. In response to such advice, the government is faced with the crucial task of ensuring intelligence and security agencies are appropriately equipped to keep Australians safe. Those agencies are entrusted with significant powers to detect, disrupt and respond to threats to the nation's security—powers that by necessity may be covert and intrusive, with the potential to infringe individual rights and freedoms if misused. Therefore, it is critical that those powers are balanced with the necessary oversight to ensure that public trust is maintained and the rule of law is upheld. Without such accountability, we risk jeopardising core aspects of our democracy in our noble endeavour to keep Australians safe. This is not to say our security and intelligence agencies are acting improperly. In fact, the strength of, and their commitment to, a culture of legality and propriety are core characteristics of these agencies. It has underpinned public trust in these institutions—and is central to the important work they do each and every day. However, the ever-evolving threat environment requires the intelligence community to become increasingly interconnected in its work. The corresponding oversight framework that provides appropriate safeguards across the national intelligence community is no longer uniform. Reform is required to provide targeted, focused and consistent oversight in response. When I was sworn in as Australia's 40th Attorney-General, I committed to uphold the rule of law and maintain the community's trust in our legal systems. Consistent with that commitment, I am therefore proud to introduce—as my first bill as Attorney-General—the Strengthening Oversight of the National Intelligence Community Bill. This bill will extend statutory and parliamentary oversight to all agencies exercising intelligence capabilities and ensure holistic oversight of the national intelligence community. And this is a bill that delivers on this government's commitment to maintain the trust and integrity of our institutions, and fundamentally, to keep Australians safe. The current oversight framework There are three key pillars of Australia's security and intelligence oversight framework: the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security, the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, and the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor. Each of these bodies plays an important and complementary role in ensuring accountability. The Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security performs dedicated statutory oversight of agencies within its jurisdiction and provides independent and impartial assurance to ministers, the parliament and the public that intelligence agencies conduct their activities with legality, propriety and in a way that is consistent with human rights. The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security reviews proposed counterterrorism and national security legislation, ensuring these laws are fit for purpose. It also reviews the administration and expenditure of agencies within its jurisdiction. Finally, the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor reviews the operation, effectiveness and implications of specific counterterrorism and national security legislation to assess whether those laws effectively address security threats and maintain respect for human rights. The existing oversight regime is strong but, as the national intelligence community evolves to meet the complex and dynamic security challenges it faces, the oversight framework must move with it. The bill This bill amends the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security Act, the Intelligence Services Act and other Commonwealth legislation to expand the jurisdictions of the inspector-general and the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security to oversee: the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission; and the intelligence functions of the Australian Transactions Reports and Analysis Centre, the Australian Federal Police, and the Department of Home Affairs. This expansion of jurisdiction will embed holistic oversight of the 10 agencies in the national intelligence community by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security and the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security. The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security currently reviews proposed counterterrorism and national security legislation as a matter of practice to ensure it is fit for purpose. The bill amends the Intelligence Services Act to put this important scrutiny mechanism on a solid legislative footing, enabling the committee to review proposed reforms to counterterrorism and national security legislation, and all such expiring legislation, on its own motion or on the basis of a referral by the responsible minister, the Attorney-General or either house of parliament. The bill amends the Intelligence Services Act and the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security Act to provide that the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security may request the inspector-general to conduct an inquiry into the operational activities of agencies within its jurisdiction. This will enable areas of concern identified by the committee to be brought to the inspector-general's attention, while simultaneously protecting the sensitive operational information of intelligence agencies and respecting the independence of this important statutory office. Further, the bill provides the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security with the ability to request a briefing from the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor, and requires the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security and the Director-General of the Office of National Intelligence to provide annual briefings to the committee. These measures are designed to ensure the committee has the necessary context and information to most effectively perform its important oversight role. The bill also strengthens the relationship between the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security, the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, and the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor, facilitating increased engagement between the intelligence community's key oversight mechanisms. Lastly, the bill amends the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor Act to enable the monitor to initiate reviews into the full suite of contemporary counterterrorism or national security legislation at the Commonwealth level. The monitor is currently able to undertake reviews into a defined list of legislation of their own motion, which limits their ability to prioritise reviews in line with emerging security threats. Expanding the monitor's mandate reflects the fact that our legislation is increasingly moving beyond terrorism related activity to address national security threats of a more varied, complex and interconnected nature. Conclusion Our intelligence community is entrusted by the public with the crucial role of keeping Australians safe from those who would seek to do us harm. Achieving this outcome necessitates balancing national security interests and the protection of individual rights. As a parliament, it is our job to get this balance right. Establishing a holistic and consistent oversight framework for the national intelligence community will do just that. The bill will ensure consistent treatment across the national intelligence community, and that the enhanced powers and capabilities with which intelligence agencies are entrusted are subject to specialist oversight. Robust oversight serves our national security interests by giving Australia's intelligence community the licence to exercise significant powers, while also assuring the public that they are doing so with accountability and integrity. In a rapidly changing security environment, effective oversight remains a critical democratic safeguard and an integral part of our legal system. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026 9

Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026

First Reading 9 Second Reading 9 09:18 Dr MULINO 132880 Fraser I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026, together with Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2025-2026 and Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2024-2025, form the principal bills underpinning the government's 2025-26 budget. These appropriation bills are substantially the same as the bills with the same names that were introduced into the 47th Parliament and lapsed on the dissolution of the House of Representatives before this year's federal election. The bills must now be reintroduced to provide the remaining seven-twelfths of annual appropriations for 2025-26 (that were not covered by the supply acts passed before the election) as well as the funding for the 2025-26 budget measures. The reintroduced bills contain minor changes which reflect government decisions and estimate variations from the 2025 pre-election economic and fiscal outlook; two election commitments, including the $800 million saving for the first year of the government's further reducing spending on consultants, contractors and labour hire, and non-wage expenses election commitment; two terminating measures that were extended beyond 2024-25; machinery-of-government changes as a result of the Administrative Arrangements Order changes on 13 May and 1 July 2025; and direct appropriations to two new entities that will commence later in 2025—the Defence and Veterans' Services Commission and the Australian Naval Nuclear Power Safety Regulator. The net effect of these changes is a $216.2 million overall reduction in the reintroduced bills from the lapsed bills. Appropriation Bill (No. 1) seeks approval for appropriations from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of approximately $83.4 billion. Together with the Supply Act (No. 1), which commenced on 1 July 2025, this would provide the total funding of $169.5 billion for the ordinary annual services of the government in 2025-26. Funding provided through this bill will support the following significant items. The Department of Defence will receive close to $25.3 billion to implement the 2024 National Defence Strategy and 2024 Integrated Investment Program, including funding for the nuclear-powered submarines, support for military operations and other Australian Defence Force activities. The Department of Health, Disability and Ageing will receive over $20.3 billion to implement various programs to improve the wellbeing and social and economic participation of people with disability, and ensure the current and future health needs of all Australians are met. There is funding of over $9 billion for the National Disability Insurance Agency to provide reasonable and necessary supports for National Disability Insurance Scheme participants. Funding also includes over $3 billion for aged-care services to provide support for older Australians with everyday living and other needs; approximately $1.2 billion for the health workforce; over $900 million for mental health and suicide prevention; over $800 million for primary health care quality and coordination; and almost $800 million for First Nations peoples' health. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade will receive over $4.2 billion to advance Australia's international strategic and security interests, provide development assistance overseas and consular assistance to Australians abroad. The Department of Home Affairs will receive over $3.2 billion to implement various programs to ensure Australia's security, prosperity and unity by safeguarding national security interests, improving cyber security and security of critical infrastructure assets, supporting law enforcement policy and operations, and maintaining Australia's cohesive multicultural society. The funding will also enable the department to maintain the integrity of the migration system, sustain visa processing capability, provide settlement services to refugees and migrants, and protect the Australian border. No changes are proposed to the maximum amount of $400 million for the advance to the Finance Minister (AFM) provision in Appropriation Bill (No. 1), which enables the government to provide additional appropriations for urgent and unforeseen expenditure during 2025-26. Details of the proposed expenditure are set out in the schedule to the bill, the explanatory memorandum, and the 2025-26 portfolio budget statements tabled in March. This bill, along with Appropriation Bill (No. 2) and Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1), must be passed before the end of November to ensure continuity of the government's programs and the operation of Commonwealth entities. I commend this bill to the chamber. Debate adjourned. Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2025-2026 10

Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2025-2026

First Reading 10 Second Reading 10 09:24 Dr MULINO 132880 Fraser I move: That this bill be now read a second time. This bill, along with Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026 and Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026, form the principal bills underpinning the government's 2025-26 budget. As was the case for Appropriation Bill (No. 1), minor changes have been made to this bill to reflect government decisions and estimate variations from the 2025 Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Outlook and to fund the 'Supporting the construction of the first-ever Hindu school in Australia'. The bill also reflects machinery-of-government changes as a result of the Administrative Arrangements Order changes on 13 May and 1 July 2025. Appropriation Bill (No. 2) seeks approval for appropriations from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of $14.6 billion. Together with the Supply Act (No. 2), this would provide the total funding of $25.5 billion for services that are not the ordinary annual services of the government in 2025-26. Funding provided through this bill will support the following significant items. 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 and enabling ICT capabilities and infrastructure. The Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, Sport and the Arts will receive close to $2.4 billion, including funding for government business enterprises to continue to deliver projects and other programs. This includes funding for the Australian Rail Track Corporation for the Inland Rail program, completion of fibre upgrades for the NBN, Western Sydney airport, National Intermodal Corporation for the development of intermodal projects, and funding for the Roads to Recovery and the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program. The Department of Finance will receive over $1.6 billion, including funding for Australian Naval Infrastructure Pty Ltd and Snowy Hydro Limited. No changes are proposed to the maximum amount of $600 million for the advance to the finance minister (AFM) provision in Appropriation Bill (No. 2). Details of the proposed expenditure are set out in the schedules to the bill, the explanatory memorandum, and the 2025-26 portfolio budget statements tabled in March. I commend this bill to the chamber. Debate adjourned. Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026 11

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

First Reading 11 Second Reading 11 09:28 Dr MULINO 132880 Fraser I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) provides appropriations for the last seven months of 2025-26 for the operations of: the Departments of the Senate, House of Representatives, Parliamentary Services, and the Parliamentary Budget Office. The bill also reflects parliamentary departments' contribution to the $800 million saving for the first year of the government's 'Further reducing spending on consultants, contractors, labour hire and non-wage expenses' election commitment. This bill seeks approval for appropriations from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of $195.1 million. Together with the Parliamentary Departments Supply Act (No. 1), this would provide the total funding of $334.7 million to support the expenditure of parliamentary departments in 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. No changes are proposed to the maximum amount of $1.9 million for the advance to the responsible presiding officer provision, which has been included in full in the Parliamentary Departments Supply Act (No. 1). Details of the proposed expenditure are set out in the schedule to the bill, the explanatory memorandum and the 2025-26 Portfolio Budget Statements tabled in March. I commend this bill to the chamber. Debate adjourned. Treasury Laws Amendment (Payments System Modernisation) Bill 2025 12

Treasury Laws Amendment (Payments System Modernisation) Bill 2025

First Reading 12 Second Reading 12 09:31 Dr MULINO 132880 Fraser I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Treasury Laws Amendment (Payments System Modernisation) Bill 2025 updates the payments system regulatory framework to address the risks posed by new and emerging technologies. The amendments expand the definitions of 'payment system' and 'participant' to ensure the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) has the ability to regulate all participants and payment systems, including digital wallet providers and 'buy now, pay later' service providers. Further, it also introduces a new ministerial designation power that will allow the Treasurer to designate payment services or platforms that present risks of national significance, allowing them to be subject to additional oversight by appropriate regulators. The bill gives the RBA greater powers to regulate a broader range of players in the payment system, as well as extending these powers to other relevant regulators where there is a material risk to the national interest. These changes will modernise our payments regulation framework to ensure it is fit for purpose now and into the future. Full details of the measure are contained in the explanatory memorandum. I commend this bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Customs Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025 12

Customs Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025

Report from Federation Chamber 12 Third Reading 12 09:34 Mr HILL 86256 Bruce by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Customs Tariff Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025 12

Customs Tariff Amendment (Australia-United Arab Emirates Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2025

Report from Federation Chamber 12 Third Reading 12 09:35 Mr HILL 86256 Bruce by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025 12

Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025

Second Reading 12 09:37 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume I rise to speak on the Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025, and 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: (1) that the strategic environment facing Australia is the most challenging since the Second World War, requiring increased investment in national defence capability; (2) that the credibility of the AUKUS partnership depends on Australia's ability to deliver housing and infrastructure for allied personnel in a timely and secure manner; (3) that the Bill expands Defence Housing Australia's responsibilities without any additional funding or a supply-side housing strategy to support defence families or allied personnel; (4) the importance of strengthening Australia's alliances with the United States and the United Kingdom through delivery—not just declarations; and (5) the urgent need for the Government to commit to increasing defence expenditure to at least 3 per cent of GDP, and to deliver the enabling capabilities required to protect Australia's prosperity, security, and way of life". The coalition supports this legislation and will facilitate its passage to support the implementation of AUKUS, but I rise also to issue a warning. This bill must not be a substitute for delivery. It cannot be another example of the Albanese government legislating without funding, promising without planning and expanding responsibility without expanding capacity. Australia faces the most challenging strategic environment since the Second World War. Authoritarian regimes around the world are flexing their muscles. We've seen it with Iran, both directly and through their proxies in the Middle East. We're seeing it with Russia and, of course, their illegal invasion of Ukraine. But we are also seeing it with the rapid military build-up by the Chinese Communist Party to our north. There is no shortage of experts telling us that we are now seeing great power conflict, or the risk of it, on a scale that we haven't seen since the Second World War. In that context, it is incredibly important that Australia do its bit, alongside our allies, to make sure that we defend our great nation, that we ensure that there is ongoing peace to our north and that we recognise above all that peace is achieved through strength and through deterrence. Weakness is provocative, and, at any time through history of great power conflict, that has always been true. This bill before us is small in size, but it is serious in consequence. It enables Defence Housing Australia to accommodate US and UK submarine crews under Submarine Rotational Force—West beginning from the third quarter of this year. These are not tourists; they are deployed allied forces who are here to train, to deter and to uphold regional stability. If we can't house them, we can't host them. And, if we can't host them, AUKUS cannot function. So let me be clear: this is not about charity for our allies; it is about our own national interests. It is important to spend a moment talking about alliances, because some in this place see alliances as compromises. They see alliances as compromises to our sovereignty. But, throughout history, we know that alliances don't undermine sovereignty—they underpin it. This has always been true, and the strength of our alliances will determine the strength of our sovereignty. It has long been true that some in this place and around our country are keen to undermine and criticise our alliances, particularly that with the United States. But this alliance has long underpinned our sovereignty and peace in the Indo-Pacific, and it will continue to for a long, long time—I have no doubt. But its continuation as an underpinning of peace in the Indo-Pacific is determined by the work we do as a key alliance partner in the region, alongside Japan and the role of others—India, of course, is increasingly playing a role in this. But those alliances are absolutely essential to peace and deterrence in the Indo-Pacific. From the First World War to Afghanistan, Australia has never secured peace by standing still; it has done so by standing alongside trusted partners, by showing resolve and by building capability. Our prosperity, our security and our way of life have always depended on our ability to deter aggression through credible cooperation, and nothing undermines that credibility faster than failure to deliver. This bill will be the first operational test of AUKUS on Australian soil. Submarine rotations, joint training, integrated deterrence—none of these work without housing. If the Albanese government fails this test, the consequences will not be contained to Stirling and Western Australia; they will be felt in Washington, in London and in every corner of the Indo-Pacific. AUKUS is a generational national project. If we failed to deliver, it would be one of the most serious foreign policy failures in living memory. The coalition support this bill because it aligns with our core principles when it comes to defence strategy. Firstly, and perhaps foremost, we strongly believe that defence policy must move from rhetoric to readiness. This means acting with urgency and getting capability into the hands of our forces now—not in 10 years time. It is beyond comprehension, in that context, that the Minister for Defence has accepted no longer receiving readiness reports and reviews from the ADF. It defies comprehension! How can we know whether we are prepared, and whether our ADF is in the position it should be in, without getting official reports from the ADF? But that is exactly what has happened in recent times under this government. Defence policy must move from rhetoric to readiness. We hear a lot of rhetoric from the Minister for Defence; he loves a good bit of rhetoric. But readiness is not built on rhetoric; it is built on reality, and we are not seeing that from the current defence minister and from this government. Secondly, we must be able to stand on our own two feet. But that is only achieved through the strength of our alliances. The strength of those alliances means that sovereignty can be real and that we are able to stand on our two feet. Now, that does mean having the capability here in Australia and, where appropriate, that capability being developed in Australia, and we have seen from this government commitments to sovereign missile manufacturing in this country that, as yet, has not occurred. Again, they're all talk and no action. If we are to be serious about sovereignty then we need to act on it, and, so far, we have seen this government and this defence minister fail on that front. Thirdly, agility must become a strategic asset. I think we have all seen in recent times, in what's occurring in Ukraine, what's occurred more recently in the Middle East and what has occurred with Israel and Iran, an increase in ability, innovation, military capability and military preparedness that was not obvious before these conflicts emerged. These technologies extend to drones, obviously, and that's been a major feature of the war in Ukraine. It's also been a major feature of the successes of Israel in recent times in taking on Iran. We need to get serious about these technologies and these innovations. We're seeing it not just in drone technology. We're seeing it in undersea technologies. We're seeing it in missile technologies. We're seeing it in sensing technologies, and of course AUKUS Pillar II is focused on exactly this. Now, it's all good to talk about it, but achieving agility is harder than talking about it. It's time this government got serious about agility in military capability and stopped setting itself goals that it fails to meet. Get on with doing the job. We need leaner decision-making, faster procurement and deployable infrastructure, not just more bureaucracy. We've got a command structure in the ADF that is going to continue to make innovation and agility incredibly difficult. Fourthly, people are the foundation of capability. If we don't house, support and retain those who serve our great nation—Australian Defence Force personnel, allied forces and critical enablers—we will ultimately have what ASPI has called a 'paper defence force'. That, of course, is completely unacceptable to the Australian people. Now, when it comes to moving from rhetoric to readiness, standing on our own two feet on the platform of our great alliances, with agility becoming a strategic asset and people becoming the foundation of our capability, this bill has the potential to touch on every one of these pillars. But its passage cannot be where the conversation ends, because, while the legislation expands Defence Housing Australia's remit, it offers no funding, no supply plan, no capacity uplift and no strategic guidance, and that is completely unacceptable. Let me turn, then, to funding and resourcing for what is required here, what is necessary to support and sit alongside this bill as a complement to it. This government continues to legislate ambition without resourcing it. It likes to do this in all sorts of places. It likes to do it in housing more generally. I mean, this is a government who committed to 1.2 million houses. It legislates ambition; it loves to do that, but where's the outcome? We know that outcome is not going to be achieved. We see it in their energy policy of 82 per cent renewables—ain't gonna happen! It's on the front page of the papers. It's not going to happen. It's not just this bill, of course. We see this pattern right across the board. Labor's Defence Strategic Review cut or delayed more than 20 major projects. Their integrated investment program remains uncosted and unfunded. It is clear, from expert after expert, that if Labor is to properly implement its own Defence Strategic Review it will need to substantially increase funding to around three per cent of GDP. But there is no such commitment from this government. This bill itself, which widens eligibility and expands responsibilities—and we welcome that—comes with zero dollars in new investment. Let me remind the House that the coalition committed to lifting defence spending to 2½ per cent of GDP within five years and to three per cent within a decade. In opposition, we have reaffirmed that three per cent is the minimum required to meet the circumstances that we face, which the Prime Minister has said are the 'most uncertain and the most dangerous, indeed, since the Second World War'. Labor is still stuck at around two per cent of GDP, and there is no credible pathway to the increase needed to deliver on what we need at this time. There is no plan to close the gap between what Defence needs and what Labor is willing to fund. They are underfunding their own defence strategy. The Prime Minister and Minister for Defence are fond of announcing reviews—they love a review; they love a target—but you cannot fight in a conflict on the back of a review. It doesn't work. Reviews are not great deterrents. Reviews are not a signal of strength. Capability is a signal of strength. You cannot deter aggression with PowerPoint, and you cannot build housing with rhetoric. We've already seen the consequences. Recruitment in the Defence Force is collapsing. In terms of personnel, We know we're thousands short of the government's own targets. Projects are on ice, capability gaps are widening, and now even housing for our allies—housing is central to the AUKUS enterprise—is being pursued without a cent of additional funding. The risk here is this: in order to house the alliance partners, the suppliers and others necessary to make AUKUS a reality, we are able to house less of our own Defence Force personnel. To crowd out our own Defence Force personnel at a time when we are struggling to recruit and retain those necessary to keep a credible defence force is completely unacceptable. This is not a serious defence posture. It is a political drift dressed up as reform. The coalition, as I say, supports this bill. But we do so while moving the second reading amendment to make clear that the government must step up. It must fund Defence Housing and allied support services, it must provide a credible plan to expand DHA's supply pipeline, it must ensure rigorous security screening for all non-ADF recipients, and, most of all, it must deliver, not delay, the enablers of capability. This is not just about Stirling, which will be the initial focus, of course, from the government. It should be. This is an absolute priority because it's central to AUKUS and central to the nuclear-submarine capability that we need at this time. But it's also about whether Australia will meet this moment, whether we can support our alliances and our commitments to a peaceful Indo-Pacific, and whether we can defend ourselves in the event of conflict. It is important to remember that the purpose of all of this is not conflict. The purpose is peace. That is the objective of the exercise here, but peace is only achieved through strength, through capability, through delivery and through reality, not rhetoric, and we are not seeing it from those opposite. Legislation is one thing; delivery is another. We won't let this bill become another example of underfunded ambition, missed opportunity and strategic naivety. When it comes to defending our great nation and when it comes to the first duty of any government, which is to protect its citizens and the prosperity of its citizens at a time like now, the Australian people expect leadership. It is easy to understate the importance of a peaceful Indo-Pacific, of trade being able to continue through the South China Sea without any kind of intervention. It is important to highlight how crucial this is not just to our safety and security but to our economic prosperity. This is a piece of this whole story that is not discussed nearly enough—that peace in the Indo-Pacific underpins our prosperity. It underpins our prosperity as well as our security, our safety. Our alliances with the United States and the UK through AUKUS but with others as well, such as Japan and India, are absolutely essential to that. Our allies expect us to be a credible partner. Our service personnel, present and future, expect a government that matches its words with action. I'll finish with a word about our defence personnel. I said earlier that this government is absolutely failing on its own goals in terms of defence personnel in this country and the recruitment and retention necessary to have a defence force of a size the government has itself set as its goal. This is letting down not just our nation but the people who serve this country now. I was very privileged last night to spend time with some of our bravest veterans, our special forces personnel. There were mostly veterans there last night to see an extraordinary documentary called Bravery and Betrayal. I strongly encourage everyone in this place to see this documentary. It is a story of the extraordinary bravery and the extraordinary sacrifices of our special forces in Iraq and in Afghanistan. There are times when I think we don't pay enough tribute to those who were part of that important work, those who sacrificed not just by serving our nation at that time but, in some cases, by making the greatest sacrifice of all and losing their lives. I pay tribute to those extraordinary men and women who served us in Iraq and Afghanistan. I pay particular tribute to those, some of whom we saw of last night and some of whose family we heard from last night, who made the ultimate sacrifice for our great nation. I commend this bill to the House. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 Is the amendment seconded? Mr Tim Wilson IMW I second the amendment. Debate adjourned. Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) (Repeal) Bill 2025 15

Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) (Repeal) Bill 2025

Second Reading 15 09:59 Mrs McINTOSH 281513 Lindsay I rise today to speak in support of the Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) (Repeal) Bill 2025. This bill takes steps to improve our health system by removing fees imposed on the pathology sector for certain categories of applications. It directly responds to the findings of the 2022 Health portfolio charging review, which made it clear that the current fees were misaligned with the broader Commonwealth charging framework. This reform is both sensible and necessary. It provides meaningful relief to the pathology sector, reduces red tape and supports the efficient delivery of essential health services. By repealing these fees, it helps to ensure that laboratories can focus more on delivering high-quality accurate testing services without being bogged down by unnecessary administrative burdens. Let me be clear. The coalition supports this bill because we understand the crucial role that pathology plays in our health system. Whether it's diagnosing cancers, managing chronic illness or detecting infections, accurate pathology services underpin nearly every element of modern health care. This bill will maintain stringent accreditation and quality assurance standards to ensure continued public confidence in Medicare-eligible pathology services. Importantly, this bill has the backing of key stakeholders in the pathology sector, including the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia, Australian Pathology and Public Pathology Australia. While this is a positive step forward, it does not make up for the broader failings of this government when it comes to Medicare. Under this Labor government it has never been harder or more expensive to access basic care. Let's look at the facts. Since Labor came to power, Medicare bulk-billing has fallen by 11 per cent. GP bulk-billing has dropped from 88 per cent to just 77 per cent, a fall that equates to 40 million fewer bulk-billed GP visits in the past year alone. Out-of-pocket costs to see a GP have skyrocketed. According to the government's own national accounts, these costs are the highest on record. More than 1.5 million Australians avoided seeing their GP last year because they simply couldn't afford it. This is a damning indictment for the government that promised to strengthen Medicare. Remember what the Prime Minister said? He looked Australians in the eye and said, 'Under Labor, all you need is your Medicare card not your credit card,' but the reality tells a very different story. Millions of Australians are pulling out their credit cards to pay for essential health care, and those credit cards are being charged more than they ever have before. What's worse is that the department of health's own incoming government brief, released under FOI, estimated that nearly a quarter of GP clinics would not bulk-bill. The Prime Minister must have known this when he made his now-infamous Medicare card statement. At a time when Australians are struggling with the rising cost of living, being forced to pay more for than ever to access a GP is not unfair; it's dangerous. While Labor stages stunts, the coalition remains focused on ensuring families can access affordable and timely health care. We have a proud record of delivering on Medicare, with funding increases every year under the coalition—growing from $18.6 billion in 2012-13 under Labor to more than $30 billion by 2021-22. Bulk-billing was higher under the coalition. When we left office, it sat at a record 88 per cent. We also invested in the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, listing 2,900 new or amended medicines, and made cheaper medicines a reality for thousands of Australians. On mental health Labor has failed entirely. They slashed Medicare funded mental-health sessions in half against the advice of experts and their own reviews. They abolished the National Mental Health Commission, and, under their watch, access to Medicare mental health support has dropped to a 10-year low, while demand has never been higher. While we support this bill, Australians deserve better. They deserve a government that tells the truth about Medicare and that actually delivers on its promises. The coalition will continue to hold the Albanese Labor government to account on Medicare, the cost of living and access to affordable care. We support this bill, but we'll not be silent on the broader failures that are leaving Australians worse off. Debate adjourned. Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025, Aged Care (Accommodation Payment Security) Levy Amendment Bill 2025 16

Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025

Aged Care (Accommodation Payment Security) Levy Amendment Bill 2025

Second Reading 16 10:06 Mrs McINTOSH 281513 Lindsay I rise to speak on the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 and the Aged Care (Accommodation Payment Security) Levy Amendment Bill 2025 taken in conjunction. With the passage of the Albanese Labor government's Aged Care Act 2024 during the last parliament, the coalition upheld our commitment to a rights based act for older Australians to guarantee a world-class aged care system into the future. Through our persistent negotiations on the act, the coalition achieved significant improvements to the government's proposed reforms that will protect the interests of older Australians and future generations. One of the most critical outcomes of our efforts was the introduction of grandfathering arrangements. These arrangements guarantee that Australians who are already in residential aged care, on a home care package or assessed as to be waiting for their allocated home care package will not see any changes to their existing arrangements. This bill provides for the essential framework to ensure that the 'no worse off' principle can be implemented. It's no secret that we are the party for hard-working Australians, and that is why we also advocated for a lower taper rate towards care contributions to ensure that those who have worked hard and saved for their retirement are dealt a fairer deal under this government. We doubled down on a fairer deal for all Australians and held the government to account on their commitment to remain the majority funder of aged care. We fought for the maintenance of a lifetime cap on care contributions, and we fought to remove the Labor government's introduction of arbitrary caps on access to cleaning and gardening—a cap the coalition did not want to see implemented during a cost-of-living crisis. This bill removes the ridiculous caps imposed by this Labor government from the primary legislation. To be clear, the Aged Care Act 2024 was Labor's package of reforms and was not co-designed with the coalition. It is of no surprise that in the first week of the 48th Parliament this government has introduced this bill to amend 325 items of their own legislation that was passed just months ago. That is why we'll be sending this bill to committee to ensure appropriate scrutiny is placed upon the proposed amendments to the Aged Care Act 2024. We remain increasingly concerned and disappointed by the lack of transparency this government has shown to the Australian public throughout their entire process of reform, because 325 changes to their own legislation is not insignificant; 197 repeals to their own legislation is also not insignificant. Many of the changes are a result of the government's lack of consultation with older Australians and the broader aged care sector. These changes must be scrutinised to ensure that the process of reform can be implemented in the best possible way. But we will not seek to delay the passage of the bill, because Australians deserve better than another broken promise and delay by this Albanese Labor government, which is consistent with what they have been doing. The Albanese Labor government provided their steadfast commitment that they were ready to implement the reforms contained in the new Aged Care Act from 1 July 2025. They promised that the Department of Health and Ageing was ready, that Services Australia was ready—and this bill proves exactly the opposite. This bill proves that the government's decision to vote down all amendments moved by the coalition in relation to transition time lines was nothing more than—guess what?—a political stunt. Without this bill, critical information cannot be shared between government departments to ensure that the reforms can be implemented. Without this bill, elements of the Aged Care Act 2024 cannot be constitutionally enacted. So, how was the government planning to meet its 1 July deadline without passing this bill? The coalition also continues to call on the government to be transparent and release all the rules associated with the Aged Care Act as soon as possible. Withholding this critical information prevents all stakeholders from being able to understand and prepare for the full impact of the reforms. Again, we remain confused about how there was going to be an ability to deliver the government's aged-care reforms from 1 July when they still have not released all the associated rules. This government lied at the election. They refused to admit that they were not ready to transition the new aged-care reform framework that they have celebrated so loudly. Then they were forced to do an embarrassing backflip on the start date for the reforms following the election. This backflip was necessary only because they refused to listen to the concerns of the aged-care sector and the coalition, creating months of unnecessary stress and uncertainty for older Australians and the aged-care providers who care for them. The most dangerous part of the government's delay on the aged-care reforms is the impact on older Australians who need essential home care services. Anthony Albanese and his government have abandoned older Australians who need support to stay independent in their own homes. They promised to deliver an additional 83,000 packages from 1 July 2025. But, again, we have a broken promise, leaving more than 87,000 older Australians waiting for a home care package and without the care they deserve. This is an appalling decision, and the coalition absolutely condemns the government for the skyrocketing waitlist they have overseen and their refusal to provide the promised packages. The waitlist for home care packages has almost tripled in the past two years under Labor's watch. Many vulnerable older Australians are waiting more than a year to access the care they have been assessed as needing. This is nothing but a national crisis. Minister Rae must urgently deliver the promised packages and address this skyrocketing waitlist as a matter of priority, because older Australians deserve access to the care they need in order to stay independent in their homes for longer. Again, the coalition supports the need for this legislation to deliver on the important changes we fought hard for, for the benefit of hardworking Australians. But we remain extremely disappointed by this government's refusal to listen to aged-care providers and its complete neglect of older Australians who need support to stay in their own homes. That is why we'll be seeking to refer both the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 and the Aged Care (Accommodation Payment Security) Levy Amendment Bill 2025 for Senate inquiries to ensure adequate consultation for the benefit of older Australians who rely on the aged-care sector. The coalition strongly supports all older Australians having access to the care they need and deserve. Debate adjourned. Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025, Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) (Repeal) Bill 2025, Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025, Aged Care (Accommodation Payment Security) Levy Amendment Bill 2025, Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2025, Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025 18

Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025

Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) (Repeal) Bill 2025

Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025

Aged Care (Accommodation Payment Security) Levy Amendment Bill 2025

Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2025

Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025

Reference to Federation Chamber 18 10:15 Ms RYAN 249224 Lalor I declare that unless otherwise ordered, the following bills stand referred to the Federation Chamber for further consideration: Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025, Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) (Repeal) Bill 2025, Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025, Aged Care (Accommodation Payment Security) Levy Amendment Bill 2025, and the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2025 and Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025 at the adjournment of the debate on the motion for the second reading of each bill. Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2025 18

Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2025

Second Reading 18 10:16 Mr HASTIE 260805 Canning The Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2025 extends the compulsory questioning warrant framework in the ASIO Act for a further 18 months to 7 March 2027. It's been a pattern over the last 10 years or so—at least whilst I've been on the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security—to sunset some of the more contentious national security bills. The questioning powers have had sunsetting powers for some time, and that's why this first bill, out of a package of two bills, is before the House today. Ahead of the sunsetting of ASIO's compulsory questioning powers, the PJCIS commenced a review into division 3 of part III of the ASIO Act in the last parliament, but this inquiry lapsed when the House was dissolved. This legislation serves as a stop-gap extension to ensure ASIO retains these powers while the reform is being progressed through the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2025, which is to be considered by parliament, as well as the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, which is the normal avenue for in-depth inquiries. The second ASIO amendment bill contains substantive reforms to the compulsory questioning power regime and will be considered by parliament separately. By way of background, these powers were introduced in the wake of the attacks of September 11, back in 2001. They came on to the statute books in 2003 to combat the growing threat of terrorism. We saw them updated and modernised to account for the development of homegrown terrorism with Islamic State about a decade ago, and now, with great power competition taking place across the globe, the rise of espionage, foreign interference and sabotage, the second bill—which we're not considering today, but it's worth foreshadowing—will modernise the compulsory questioning powers to include those more pressing threats. We know that the ASIO director-general has talked often over the years about espionage and foreign interference and now sabotage being real and pressing threats to Australian national security, and that's why it's good that we're updating these laws. Since its introduction, the compulsory questioning framework has been renewed five times before it was due to cease, and this has resulted in the questioning framework being in force continuously since 2003—that's 22 years of bipartisan support for these tools. We wish we didn't have these on the statute books at all, but, in today's world, it's necessary that we protect the Australian people through such a legislative framework because ASIO's compulsory questioning powers remain a valuable intelligence collection tool. It's also a tool of interdiction and disruption in an increasingly complex security landscape. This legislation will ensure there is no disruption to ASIO's access to these powers while further reforms are considered by the parliament. I want to note that there are people on both sides of the House who have concerns about such powers, and certainly I'm alive to those. I think oversight of these powers is really important. Accountability and transparency is part of our democratic tradition. So whoever on the PJCIS looks at these closely from our side at least will make sure that these concerns are addressed within the public inquiry and also behind closed doors when these discussions are handled within the committee itself. I want to the put on the record very, very clearly that the coalition will always support sensible reforms which empower Australian men and women serving on the front line in intelligence and law enforcement roles. We'll always back our intelligence officers in ASIS, our intelligence officers in ASIO and the AFP officers in law enforcement, who every day in the shadows work hard to keep us safe. So we'll be supporting this bill without amendment. Debate adjourned. Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025 19

Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025

Second Reading 19 10:21 Mr CONAGHAN 279991 Cowper I rise today to speak on the Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill and note that Australia has always stood by our neighbours in the Pacific and we always will. We share a region and deep enduring ties, from early trade between Indigenous Australians and Pacific islanders to the courage shown along the Kokoda Trail to standing together after natural disasters. The coalition has a proud record in the Pacific. In 2021-22, we delivered a record $2.7 billion in support, including loans across aid, security, health and financial programs. Under the coalition, we became the only country with diplomatic missions in every Pacific Islands Forum nation. We deepened maritime cooperation through the $2 billion Pacific Maritime Security Program, delivering 14 of 21 Guardian class patrol boats. We will continue to work constructively with the government on these issues because, when our mates need help, Australia steps up. The Pacific Islands Forum has made it very clear that debanking poses a serious threat to the Pacific economies. Debanking occurs when major international banks withdraw services from local institutions, disconnecting them from the global financial system. Many Pacific economies rely on correspondent banking relationships to stay connected. For example, a construction business in Tonga might import building equipment from Brisbane. Because their local bank doesn't have a direct link to Australian banks, a larger institution, like ANZ, steps in to process the international payment. That's a correspondent banking relationship. When it's lost, trade, payment processing and investment become so much harder, so much slower and so much more expensive. But these relationships are under pressure. Regulatory costs for major banks have increased and, for many, the returns from servicing these markets no longer stack up. Since 2011, correspondent banking relationships in the South Pacific have fallen by 60 per cent. This creates openings for alternative financial networks, some of which may lack transparency or fall outside global anti-money-laundering standards. If trusted Pacific nations lose access to Australian banking, others will fill the void, right on our doorstep. We cannot afford to let that happen. This bill supports Australia's financial presence in the Pacific by underwriting Australian bank operations in the regions. The announced $2 billion, 10-year guarantee for ANZ is the first of these guarantees. The coalition strongly supports the principle of this bill, but we want to be upfront with taxpayers about what the bill provides—an uncapped, open-ended appropriation with no end date. Yes, Treasury has advised the risk of a call on these guarantees is low, and, yes, we expect future guarantees to follow the ANZ model being time bound and financially limited. But proper safeguards and oversight are essential. This is taxpayers' money. We're being asked to underwrite the international operations of our banks, and Australians deserve to know exactly what risks are involved. We want confidence that these guarantees will work, and we want to know why the bill must have an uncapped appropriation with no date. That's why, while we will not oppose the bill, it should go to the Senate Economics Legislation Committee, not to delay it but to make sure the details are right and taxpayer funds are properly protected. Australia will always stand with the Pacific, and the coalition will always stand up for Australian taxpayers. Debate adjourned. Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Penalty and Overtime Rates) Bill 2025 19

Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Penalty and Overtime Rates) Bill 2025

Reference to Committee 19 10:27 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein I move: That the Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Penalty and Overtime Rates) Bill 2025 be referred to the Standing Committee on Education and Employment for consideration and an advisory report by 7 October 2025. During the election, the Albanese government put forward a proposition and ran a successful scare campaign amongst the Australian community that there was a serious issue—that penalty rates across this nation were at risk. There was simply no basis to do so, but, since the election, the Albanese government has put forward legislation to bring effect to its scare campaign, to make sure that they can deliver on the basis on which they went to the last election. We understand that. The coalition supports penalty rates, but there has been a fundamental problem since we have got to this point. The legislation which has been put forward to this parliament is sloppy and poorly drafted, and there has been very poor consultation with the Australian community. We have seen this. As an example, the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry has said: This change is a backwards step and out of touch with the realities of a modern economy … …   …   … This Bill is at odds with the Government's plans to improve productivity, and instead injects more rigidity and complexity into the Fair Work laws. When the minister was asked directly about the number of small businesses that will be impacted as a consequence of this legislation, there was no answer because there was no consultation and there was no consideration. We have heard directly from the Australian Industry Group, who have said: This is badly drafted legislation that is going to make it harder for employers to employ people who want to work when it suits them. It will reduce avenues for lifting productivity when we are about to convene … on how to lift it. We have industry saying there is no consultation or engagement on this sloppily drafted legislation from the minister. We know a very serious and real impact is that it will undermine the capacity for Australians to get employed by small businesses, and, as we know, we have a much bigger challenge across the Australian community right now with the record number of business insolvencies. That could then have a direct impact, where we could see Australians lose their jobs because businesses no longer exist. There is a simple reality. When you have sloppy legislation that is poorly drafted, where stakeholders are now directly calling it out, where the minister can't even answer how many small businesses this legislation impacts, where a regulatory impact statement has not even been completed by the minister and there is clearly no interest in doing so, it means at every single step of the legislation to this point we have had a minister incapable of doing their job and consulting with the industries that are going to be impacted. Ironically, the people that they claim they are going to assist and support as a consequence of this legislation are the ones most likely to bear the brunt of the sloppy work being done by this government. It's simply a reality that we need a proper process to give due consideration to this legislation to remove the risks that are now being proposed as a consequence of the sloppy work of this government, because we simply cannot have a situation in this country right now where the government isn't on top of its agenda. But, in addition, there's this downstream impact where we could see Australian small businesses go into the Albanese government's sinkhole and, further than that, see jobs lost and lost economic opportunity. I'll keep making the point that there are no penalty rates applied to jobs that don't exist. When you look at the broader economic environment that we have right now—you've seen the data—the number of small businesses is declining and unemployment is rising. Everything that should be going down is going up, and everything that is going up should be going down. This is the lived reality of small business. We should make sure they are fully considered in the conversation on this legislation. But, instead, the approach of the government is see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil, or see no small business, hear no small business, speak to no small business. That is the reality of the engagement this minister has had currently on her industrial relations legislation, and the impact is not going to be felt just by small businesses—although, of course, it absolutely is. Deputy Speaker Young, you understand the realities of small business very clearly. The impact is going to be felt by the workers of this country because they are the ones who will bear the brunt of the sloppy work of the Albanese government, who don't understand how to draft the legislation to bring their legislative victory lap to full effect. There is simply a reasonable request on behalf of the opposition that, when we have legislation of this nature in the context of trying to change the laws around penalty rates and overtime rates, we have a reasonable process of consideration, consultation and engagement to bring small businesses and their voices into the parliament of this nation. It is so important. Small businesses in this country right now feel abandoned by this government. They feel they have no voice and no say in the national conversation. It's important that they have the opportunity to stand up and speak for themselves, to directly challenge the agenda of the government when they are not acting with any goodwill and to make sure that they have a pathway to be heard on the record of this nation. We are not getting that from this government. As I said, the minister has not consulted them successfully to date. She has not really even engaged with the sector to date. They are now raising their deep and abiding concerns about the legislation that has been put forward that the government is trying to ram through. They're trying to ram through the legislation because—believe it or not—they actually want to block workers from getting pay rises. This whole process began because the retail industry applied to Fair Work to aggregate up penalty rate arrangements so that workers could be given a 35 per cent pay rise. So all those mums out there who work in retail during the week, but who don't want to work on weekends because they're supporting their families, and all the young students who might decide that they want to have flexible education arrangements, are all losing out because of the Albanese government. All we want to do is to give them a say by making a recommendation to the employment, workplace relations, skills and training committee for proper consideration of this legislation. It is a reasonable request, but we have sloppy work and sloppy legislation being put to the parliament. There is a time now where those voices need to be heard in this parliament. We want to make sure that we can stand up and give them their say in the nation's house and in the process of the legislation that is so important for the future of this country. We want to make sure that we're actually doing things to lift up and empower small business to be part of the success of this country. But if we see a situation where the government wants to silence small business—to silence those who would benefit from the economic opportunity of having terms and conditions that work for them—to silence and shut down any debate from the voices in this important issue, then we will see revealed the real face of the Albanese government once the mask has slipped. We get that they have a political agenda; we completely understand. Of course they'll engage in their legislative victory lap after the last election. But Australian jobs, Australian wages and of course small businesses and their success as part of the foundation of the future success of this country are on the line. We are not simply going to allow the government to trample over and ignore proper process, including the sloppy drafting of the legislation by the minister. We simply want a process where a committee can go off to look at the legislation and give it due consideration: socialise it with the community, look at the reality of what it is going to do and, more importantly, seek the feedback and counsel of small businesses across the country and bring those voices into this nation's parliament. It's a simple proposition, and I would have thought that if the government were so confident about their legislation—if they believe their legislation is so good and that it's going to do exactly what they think it is designed to achieve—they would of course support the process. Why wouldn't sunlight be the best disinfectant for the legislation put before the House? That is why we table this here; to bring in the voices of the future to the parliament of this country. That is what I think members in this parliament should want as well. I want to make sure that the members of this parliament have the opportunity to enable and mobilise the small businesses of this country to be able to have their say into the committee process as well. That's because we are on the side of empowering Australians to do the best they can. If it is your first job—your first opportunity in the workforce—and if you want to see a lift in the standards of wages and work, then we want to back you in as part of the bigger conversation. We want to see your success tied to Australia's national success. When we win, we all win. So the legislation before the parliament right now still needs work. I understand that the minister wants to ram it through the parliament and doesn't want to go through the process of inquiry—probably not in the House or the Senate, but who knows what goes on in the mystical land of the red chamber! But it is so important that we have this process right now, because the sloppy drafting that the stakeholders have raised raises really serious issues about what needs to be done so that we can protect Australian jobs, Australian small businesses and, of course, penalty rates and economic opportunity for this country. I'm just going to draw attention again to the realities. The Australian Retailers Association, who wanted to give workers a 35 per cent pay rise, made the case that it would remove flexibility in wage negotiations and introduce additional cost complexities and administrative pressures. Retailers argue that many workers prefer consistent, reliable income rather than complex penalty structures, and that modern agreements which include higher base pay offer stability and simplicity without sacrificing take-home pay. The Minerals Council, once they saw the legislation that came out of the vault from within the government and the drafting process, before the minister had socialised or consulted successfully with anybody to the point where anybody would have highlighted its significant short comings, reflected: The government's changes will reduce productivity and compromise Australia's competitiveness in global export markets. The laws are also becoming a decisive material factor in whether new projects proceed or not— Again, the difference between whether you get a job or not— and whether billions of dollars in investment capital is invested in Australia or elsewhere. This is simple. I would have thought, if the government so believes in their legislation, they would have no problem sending it off to a committee to have the proper consideration of the legislation. All we want to do is make sure that Australians have their say in the laws that come before this parliament. We had an election. We're respecting the fact that of course the government has a right to go on. They've run their scare campaign, and they've succeeded in it. They're now trying to implement it. Let us be realists. That is, make sure that you do no harm in the process of implementing your scare campaign and that we actually do things to back Australian workers and jobs so that we have the pathway to bring in Australian voices, small businesses, into the conversation when the minister wants to shut them out. As I will go through again, the Australia Industry Group's own observations, 'This is badly drafted legislation that is going to make it harder for employers to employ people.' When you get that sort of language from employer groups saying that it is going to be harder to give people jobs, give labourers jobs, allegedly the people that the Labor Party claimed they represented—today it's not really clear who they represent, but that's a separate issue and a topic for another day—the reality is, when you get that sort of language and that sort of clarity, what you get is a reflection that they do not understand what they're doing. I get they've their political priorities. It does not mean 'Hear no business, see no business, speak to no small business.' We want them to be part of the conversation. Now is the time for them to turn up. Now is the time to stand up and support our simple recommendation of inquiry, and I'm quite sure that the gaggle of Labor members appearing in the chamber, including the Leader of the House, is of course because they are going to come in here and support an inquiry to back their legislation. The SPEAKER 53517 Is the motion seconded? Mr Venning 315434 I second the motion and reserve my right to speak. 10:42 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I've got to say, the second of the two speeches made more sense than the first. I think it's probably the aspiration of every member of this parliament, if we could be half as good in life as the shadow minister thinks he is, we'd all be doing extraordinarily well. Talk about not learning a thing! There has never been a pay rise for the Australian workers that they have supported. Never once. But the arguments are always the same. The arguments that we just heard from the shadow minister were that getting the pay cut is, 'the difference in whether you get a job or not'. I remember we heard this last term. The shadow minister—I'll say a bit more about this later—while he wasn't in this place last term, it seems he was listening intently, because he's adopted all the same arguments we heard last time. When we argued that 'same job, same pay' was part of justice in making sure that people's pay wasn't cut, we heard opposite: 'Oh no, no! That will drive inflation up, if you give people a pay rise, and people will lose their jobs.' When we argued that you have to have minimum standards for gig workers, those opposite said the same two things. They said, 'Oh no, no! That will drive prices up, and it will drive unemployment.' When we said that we had to get pay equity for women and made sure gender equality was an objective of the Fair Work Act, those two offered the same two arguments that we've heard here—that it will hit inflation and that it will hit jobs. Right back at the 2022 election campaign, when the now Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, as the then Leader of the Opposition, was asked whether he would support a pay rise for minimum-wage earners that made sure they didn't go backwards, he answered with one word: 'absolutely!' We remember that word. The response from those opposite was that it must've been a mistake and that it must've been a gaffe. How could anyone possibly have the conviction that workers should not be going backwards? Well, the conviction that people should be going backwards is the only conviction that is consistent for those opposite. Look at the outcomes. After all the things that they said would drive up inflation, what happened? Inflation went from having a six in front of it to getting back within the Reserve Bank's target band. What happened to unemployment after all their arguments saying, 'Oh, if you do something good for workers' wages, people will end up without jobs'? What happened? We ended up with the best and the lowest unemployment record of any government. That's what we had. This side of the House believes that people should be well paid; this side of the House wants people to be in work. But this side of the House will never accept the principle that the pathway to getting a good job is to have your pay cut, and to lose penalty rates is to have your pay cut. That's exactly what it means. Those opposite said—and I tried to take down so many quotes; I was enjoying the speech I'll concede—they're on the side of empowering Australians to do the best they can. They want to empower people. No-one thinks a pay cut makes them more powerful. No-one believes that. Penalty rates are the way that people who are working inconvenient hours can hold their lives together. It's a way they can make ends meet. There has never been a moment— Mr Tim Wilson IMW What about the inquiry? Mr BURKE DYW I'll get to the issue of the inquiry in a minute, because my favourite quote was 'sloppy drafting', but, wait, we'll get to that. Hold that thought for me; work with me here. Penalty rates are the way that people hold their lives together and make sure that they have a pathway of coping with the cost of living. It is no surprise that the example that he hung on to saying, 'Here was an industry that was willing to have a higher base rate in return for getting rid of penalty rates,' was an industry where overwhelming the bulk of the shifts are in penalty rate periods. Do you really think that proposal was designed for employers to have to pay more? There has never been a time when a transfer of income from profit margins to workers' wages has been supported by those opposite. I guess at one level I'm happy that they still don't get it, but the reality is the cost of living is about the difference between the money that comes into your bank account and the costs that go out. For three and a bit years now, every time there's something about lowering prices those opposite have opposed it; every time there's something about increasing wages they've opposed it. If you want people to be paid less and for their medicines and expenses to all cost more, that is the worst outcome for the cost of living. That is exactly what those opposite took to the last election, and it's exactly what the shadow minister is pointing to now. On the full 15 minutes of the shadow minister's speech, I'd remind him that speaking times as listed in the standing orders are a limit, not a target, and, when you run out of things to say, you don't have to keep going. It's okay to stop when you've run out of material. The line that was my favourite—and he kept coming back to it—was 'sloppy drafting', and so I thought, if he's alleging sloppy drafting, maybe we ought to have a look at the motion he's just moved. Let me tell people what the motion is in front of the House right now. It says: That the Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Penalty and Overtime Rates) Bill 2025 be referred to the Standing Committee on Education and Employment for consideration and an advisory report … So you then go to the Notice Paper and you go to the list of committees. If you look at the Notice Paper—there are copies just there if you need them—on page 14 you get the list of House committees. He's referring the bill to a committee that doesn't exist. So I'm sort of tempted—we could just vote for this, and it would go nowhere. It would go absolutely nowhere. It would be like referring the bill to the shadow cabinet. It goes absolutely nowhere. I think it would be fun to have a vote on it because I'd like to see how many of his colleagues would be forced to wander into this chamber to fiercely demand that this bill be referred to a committee of the House of Representatives that does not exist. I'll let you know now that we're going to vote no. If you want to call the division, you have the second voice. If he leaves, then you're on your own, and it won't happen. But I'd encourage you—no matter how impossible this motion is, no matter how completely wrong the drafting is and no matter how many times you've got upset and passionate about sloppy drafting. The call is yours now. Does the opposition stand loyally, strongly with their shadow minister and force the whole of the coalition to vote right now that a bill on penalty rates be referred to a committee that does not exist? I commend the consideration of this resolution to the House. The SPEAKER 53517 The question before the House is that the motion be agreed to.  

The House divided. [10:55]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

42 AYES Aldred, M. R. Batt, D. J. Bell, A. M. Birrell, S. J. Boele, N. Boyce, C. E. Buchholz, S. Caldwell, C. M. Chaffey, J. L. Chester, D. J. Conaghan, P. J. Hamilton, G. R. Hastie, A. W. Hawke, A. G. Hogan, K. J. Joyce, B. T. G. Landry, M. L. (Teller) Le, D. T. Littleproud, D. McCormack, M. F. McIntosh, M. I. McKenzie, Z. A. O'Brien, L. S. Pasin, A. Penfold, A. L. Pike, H. J. (Teller) Price, M. L. Rebello, L. S. Ryan, M. M. Sharkie, R. C. C. Small, B. J. Steggall, Z. Tehan, D. T. Thompson, P. Venning, T. H. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Webster, A. E. Willcox, A. J. Wilson, R. J. Wilson, T. R. Wood, J. P. 90 NOES Abdo, B. J. Albanese, A. N. Aly, A. Ambihaipahar, A. Berry, C. G. Bowen, C. E. Briskey, J. L. Burke, A. S. Burnell, M. P. Burns, J. Butler, M. C. Byrnes, A. J. Campbell, J. P. Chalmers, J. E. Charlton, A. H. G. Chesters, L. M. Clare, J. D. Claydon, S. C. Clutterham, C. L. Coffey, R. K. Coker, E. A. Comer, E. L. Conroy, P. M. Cook, K. M. G. Cook, P. A. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. France, A. A. Freelander, M. R. French, T. A. Garland, C. M. L. Georganas, S. Giles, A. J. Gorman, P. P. Gosling, L. J. Gregg, M. J. Hill, J. C. Holzberger, R. A. V. Husic, E. N. Jarrett, M. L. Jordan-Baird, M. A. M. 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, R. G. Moncrieff, D. S. Mulino, D. Neumann, S. K. Ng, G. J. O'Neil, C. E. Payne, A. E. 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. Scamps, S. A. Scrymgour, M. R. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Smith, M. J. H. Soon, X. Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Teesdale, J. A. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Urquhart, A. E. Watson-Brown, E. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. White, R. P. Wilson, J. H. Witty, S. J. Zappia, A. 0 PAIRS

Question negatived.

 STATEMENTS 24 STATEMENTS Universities Accord (Cutting Student Debt by 20 Per Cent) Bill 2025 24 11:03 Mr BURNELL 300129 Spence I'm proud to support the Universities Accord (Cutting Student Debt by 20 Per Cent) Bill 2025—a bill that delivers real cost-of-living relief, makes our education system fairer and reflects our Aussie values—because that's what we do on this side of the House. I often feel that the people of Spence really feel they can relate to the immortal lyrics of the great Dolly Parton, 'Barely getting by; it's all talking and no giving,' but last Wednesday, at the very beginning of this 48th Parliament of Australia, after talking the talk before the election, we walked the walk and gave something back by introducing this bill. When people are doing it tough, we don't just look away. That's not the Labor way, and it sure isn't the Australian way. We get stuck in and help each other out. This bill delivers on our election commitment to cut all student debt by 20 per cent. No matter your degree, your speciality, your pathway or whether you completed your degree, if you have a HECS debt you will benefit from this bill. This isn't just limited to HECS debt. If you have a VET or TAFE loan, those debts will also be reduced by 20 per cent. This is real cost-of-living relief for three million Australians with student debt. Whether you're fresh out of studying and into a new job, saving to buy a home and live out the Australian dream or juggling a mortgage or a family or even both, we know that every little bit helps. Not everyone gets that, though. Before the election, the Liberals called this relief 'profoundly unfair'. They opposed it and said that they would not do the same if they won on 3 May. Millions of Australians voted to make this cut a reality, so you would think that the Liberal Party would have heard what people said and changed their tune before coming to Canberra this week. You would think that they would support this, and we had a reason to believe they would when the opposition leader said that they would wave it through. But then on Monday one of the members in this place called 20 per cent off student debt grossly unfair. To them I say this: I hope you have the hide to say that to the over 19,000 people in Spence whose student debt will be cut when this bill passes or the over 470,000 teachers, 300,000 nurses and midwives and 210,000 aged-care workers and disability carers that will benefit from this cut. This bill does something else too. It also cuts the minimum and annual repayments Australians with a student debt have to make every year. In other words it means if you have a HECS debt you'll have to pay less back each year. For someone making $70,000, these changes will reduce HECS payments by $1,300 a year. It means that you only have to start paying off your uni degree when uni starts to pay off for you. That puts money back in the pockets of people who are just out of uni, just moving out of home, just getting started in life. That's why I really care about this—not because it was recommended in a review but because it will make people's lives just a little bit easier. That's why we should all be in here in this place. If that's not why you're here serving this parliament, serving your constituency, it's time to reconsider your priorities. I want people in Spence to have every opportunity in life that the people in Burnside do. But, for so many people, uni has just been that dream that has often felt too far out of reach. There's still more to do here to make uni as accessible as possible for people in my community. These changes are part of it. Paid prac placements for teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work students are part of it. It's also why we're delivering a new university study hub in Elizabeth. It brings uni closer to where people live so they can balance work, study and family more easily, without having to trek into the city. It will also help more people from Spence get a fair crack at going to uni. This study hub is due to officially open in its forever home in the coming months, and I can't wait to see the benefits it will deliver to our students and our community. We've also made HECS indexation fairer to make sure your debt can never grow faster than your wages. We're delivering more fee-free TAFE and university-ready courses, and we're making free TAFE permanent to make sure we have the skills we need. But there's more to do, and that'll take time. There's no silver bullet that will fix this overnight, especially not with how those opposite left things. During the pandemic, school, TAFE and university became more stressful than normal. Classes went online. Placements were cancelled or delayed. Jobs disappeared overnight. Isolation, stress and uncertainty became the new norm. Yet students pressed on. They kept studying. They adapted and improvised. They made so many sacrifices, as we all did, to finish their degrees. What did the Liberals do? I wish I could say they did nothing, but it was even worse than that. They hiked up fees and made it harder for young people to get a crack at university—just a complete slap in the face. That's the real contrast here. In the red corner you have a government that's stepping up to ease the burden, and in the blue corner you have the party that made things worse then turned its back when people needed it most. Let's be clear. This 20 per cent cut isn't just about money. It's about recognising the effort, the grit and the emotional toll that studying can take on students. It's about saying, 'We see you, we value you and we've got your back,' because education isn't a throwaway privilege for the few; it's a right, a pillar of opportunity. When people invest in their education, when they take out a loan to try and build a better future, they shouldn't be punished for it. They shouldn't be hit with rising repayments, inflated indexation and political spin that says, 'Just deal with it.' That is what I consider 'grossly unfair'. What's also unfair is stacking decades worth of debt onto a generation that's already locked out of homeownership. What's unfair is expecting our teachers, our nurses and our early childhood educators to take on debt for the privilege of doing jobs this country desperately needs. We don't get stronger as a nation by keeping people underwater. We grow by lifting each other up. This policy does just that. In Spence you'll find suburbs where fewer than one in five young people go to uni, not because they're not smart, not because they don't want to but because they look at the cost—the long-term debt and the uncertainty—and decide it's not worth it. This 20 per cent wipe tells them a different story. It says: 'We believe in you. We're going to look out for you now and we're going to keep looking out for you in the future.' That matters, especially in places like Elizabeth, Davoren Park, Munno Para and Salisbury North, where people have talent in spades but often do not have the financial backing to make dreams a reality. While I'm proud of what this bill delivers, I'm also thinking about where we go from here, because this can't be the end of the conversation about student debt in this country. We've got to keep looking at how we support the next generation of tradespeople, teachers, social workers and researchers. We've got to make sure that someone's postcode doesn't determine their potential. That's why we'll keep pushing for more support for students, especially in regional and outer suburban areas, because it's not just tuition that holds people back; it's travel, rent and time away from paid work. Those barriers disproportionately hit the exact people we most need in our workforce. We're talking about students who want to become community nurses, aged-care workers and youth justice case managers—the real backbone of society. I do not want to have to tell them, 'Hey, it's great that you want to serve others, but it's going to cost you thousands in lost income while you do it.' I know that some people in this place might like to sneer when we talk about transformational change. They scoff at the idea that something like a HECS debt cut could change lives. Well, I invite them to spend a week in Spence, to sit down with a nursing student in Andrews Farm, a social work student in Craigmore or a first-in-their-family uni kid from Smithfield. Tell them their future doesn't matter. Tell them it's too expensive to give them a break. I guarantee you, what some might consider a handout we call fairness. What some call reckless we call responsible nation building. This government is delivering for people—not just headlines, not just slogans but practical, meaningful change. This bill is proof of that. It's a reflection of the values that I, alongside my Labor colleagues, bring with us every day when representing our communities: fairness, opportunity and respect for working people, as well as an unshakable belief that government should be a force for good. So, to the three million Australians who have student debt, I say this: we heard you, we backed you and we'll keep backing you, because your future is this nation's future. I commend this bill to the House. 11:12 Mr KHALIL 101351 Wills My electorate of Wills is home to many students. Wills, and the suburbs in the Wills electorate, is actually a choice for many students, because they can get to Melbourne uni and RMIT by tram, to La Trobe University by bus and to Victoria University, Swinburne and Monash University by train. When you're walking around Brunswick, North Fitzroy or North Carlton in my electorate, these suburbs are right at the heart of where the university sector is. There are a lot of young people walking around in Doc Martens—apparently they're still a thing; I remember them from when I was young— Ms Price 249308 They never go out of fashion. Mr KHALIL 101351 They never go out of fashion; that's correct, Member for Durack. According to the last census, 12.6 per cent of people in Wills are students, and they're students in tertiary education; 44.2 per cent of the people in Wills have a bachelor's degree or above. It is a very highly educated electorate, being one of the highest in the country on both measures. People don't deserve to be burdened by a lifetime debt because of their choice to study. They deserve to be supported by their government, by this government. That's what we're doing. We're supporting those people by cutting 20 per cent off student loan debts, increasing the minimum repayment threshold and introducing a marginal repayment system for student debt. But what does this legislation really mean for someone in my community? Let's take the example of James. There is a real James here, one of the young people I've spoken to about the HECS debt that they have. James is 27. He has a HECS debt of $68,700 and earned just above $82,500 last financial year. This bill that we're passing here will cut $13,700 from James's HECS debt and he will have around an extra $800 a year in his pocket from our reduction in the compulsory repayment amount. This is thousands of dollars more in people's pockets, providing necessary cost-of-living relief while allowing them to save and invest more in what they want and what they need. It also means James will repay his HECS debt sooner. He says to me he'll put it towards his savings for a home deposit, which he noted will become much more achievable thanks to our government's Help to Buy shared equity scheme. Thank you, James. This bill is just one part of what the Labor government has done for education in Australia. Many of my constituents knew what was at stake at the last election. If the Liberals had won government, they would have scrapped all of this. None of this would have actually materialised. Our government is providing $2.5 billion for all Victorian public schools over the next decade as part of the Gonski reforms. That means more individualised support for students. Meanwhile, we have the Liberal Party's former leader saying that school funding 'isn't an issue'. That's surprising! The Liberals went to the last election opposing this 20 per cent cut to student debt. In fact, their party and members of their party labelled it 'elitist' and 'profoundly unfair'. That's what they said about this 20 per cent cut. They said—and this is the irony of this—that they'd rather wipe off $20,000 for bosses' lunches! Please tell me, Deputy Speaker, which of those is 'elitist' or 'profoundly unfair'? I know which one is. Earlier this year, the Liberals opposed making free TAFE courses permanent. They opposed Labor delivering half a million fee-free TAFE places—the fee-free TAFE program that is delivering more nurses, childcare workers, tradies and workers for other high-demand industries. They gutted TAFE last time they were in government. During the election, the Liberals released costings showing they planned to cut our expansions to the Commonwealth Prac Payment that were done in our first term, which would've forced student teachers to give up paid work to complete teaching placements. We put those prac payments in place because we knew how important it was for their cost-of-living relief in doing their work and their study. Last time the Liberals were in government, they increased university fees. They wanted younger Australians to be straddled with more debt as they were starting out their lives. They made humanities degrees more expensive, as if studying humanities should only be for the wealthy. A lot of people know that I grew up in a Housing Commission home. I'm a houso, like the Prime Minister and like the Minister for Agriculture. There are probably a few more in this House. But because of the visionary policies of successive Labor governments, I got the opportunity to study arts and law at Melbourne university, even though I grew up in a Housing Commission home. Those policies by the Hawke and Keating governments gave me a pathway, like they did for millions of Australians, because education is so critically important. It opens up the door to opportunity for so many Australians, and it's because of education that I've been able to make my contribution, as millions of other Australians have done, whether in the public sphere or in the private sector. It has given me a pathway to having this honour of representing the people of Wills in this place. I know that the Minister for Education, my friend Jason Clare, has spoken of his story about being the first member of his family to get a higher education. That's because of those policies. That's what makes a difference, because we believe in education as an investment in the Australian people. My mum and dad, who migrated from Egypt over 50 years ago, worked so hard—and this is not a unique story; migrants have this in common—to give my sister and I a better life. The one thing they kept saying to us is: 'Get a good education. Make sure that you get a good education. We don't care what you do—you can work in a factory, you can be a tradie, or you can be a professor; do whatever you want to do in life—but make sure you get an education and get a degree. Fulfil your potential and give yourself that pathway.' That's what dad used to say to me all the time: 'Get a good education.' This bill to cut 20 per cent of student debt represents real cost-of-living relief for millions of young Australians. It's money they'll see more of in their take-home pay. It's money they'll put in their saving accounts as they save up for a house deposit, a down payment on a new rental or another major purchase. But, more importantly, it is an investment in them. It is an investment in their future, their education, their potential, their pathway to being able to make their contribution to change their community for the better, to change lives for the better. That's what education gives us. It is a precious gift that we all are very, very fortunate to be given, and we, as a government, invest in that precious gift with this bill. I commend it to the House. 11:20 Mr BURNS 278522 Macnamara When you think about the great leveller in this country that allows people to have social mobility and allows migrants the ability to change the destination and the journey of generations, it is education. It gives people the ability to create skills and qualifications, to learn and to finish their studies with the opportunities of making a better life for them and their family. We know that the HECS system has meant, over time, that thousands more Australians have been able to go to university. My parents' generation went to university for free, but the HECS generation—my generation and the generations that follow—are part of a generation that has a pact with each and everyone of us that says: 'We will contribute to education because it will mean more of us can go and get an education. It will mean the HECS system that we are all buying into enables more people from right around the country, regardless of where we come from, to access high-quality Australian education, whether it be at our universities, our TAFEs, as apprentices or any of the other incredible higher education services and institutions that we have in this country.' But we also know that the balance, over time, has meant that people are leaving university with higher debt. They are leaving university with debt that has meant that it's having an impact on how they can borrow, it's having an impact on how much they have to pay each and every pay cycle. It's a debt that is having a real impact on the lives and the journeys of Australian students and young people. That's what this bill, the Universities Accord (Cutting Student Debt by 20 Per Cent) Bill 2025, addresses. Cutting 20 per cent off student HECS debt is something that we took to the election. We said we were going to do it. I remember the countless stories of young people lining up, going in to vote. I asked them a simple question: 'What matters to you? What do you care about?' Often the response was, 'Well, you know, I'm a student' or 'I just finished university.' I said, 'Have you heard about our 20 per cent off HECS?' And they said, 'Yes; actually that's one of the things I'm weighing up right now.' There was an amazing moment I shared with a lot of students and former students: 'If you give us this opportunity, we'll get this done for you.' I'm extremely proud to be standing here in this place keeping up our end of the deal, because so many of those young people and so many people who have a HECS debt gave us this opportunity. They said that they needed a bit of help, they needed some meaningful change, and that is what this bill is all about. It does not wipe every part of student debt. What it says is actually there is a meaningful amount of student debt that we're going to take off, as well as how those repayment systems are calculated so that at each and every pay cycle, you're going to pay a little bit less than you otherwise were before. This builds on the reforms we made to HECS which changed the indexation system. Traditionally HECS was set up in a way that meant we were always calculating the HECS repayment system with the lowest interest loan available; but with the high inflation that presented itself to Australians recently it meant the indexation on HECS was extremely high and students were accumulating more and more debt. We fixed that. We also wiped off the differentiation between the higher repayments verse the recalculated repayments. This bill takes it a significant step further. This bill says that if you have a HECS debt of $27,600, which is the average HECS debt, you're going to have $5,520 wiped off that debt. That is a meaningful amount for that person with the average amount of HECS debt. It isn't just for university debts. It also includes debts from TAFE courses and apprenticeship loans. In my community of Macnamara, we have a real commitment and passion for education. We have a very high number of people who go to university and we also have a very high number of people who have higher educational qualifications from other institutions, especially from our incredible TAFEs in Melbourne, which give people these amazing skills. We know there is no substitute for learning on the job, and some of the closest people in my life have started their careers as apprentices and have gone on to do amazing things in construction and in other parts of our community. I know that they have worked extremely hard to get where they are and that being an apprentice meant they were able to start their journey. To the 26,948 people who live in Macnamara who have a HECS debt: this bill is for you. This is the bill we committed to at the election, and this is the bill we said we were going to deliver for you. I just want to say that I am so grateful to everyone who gave us the opportunity to implement this policy. I know there are young people who have a whole range of competing interests in their lives and there are a whole range of issues that confront them. But I think the last election was about the simple things that were going to create meaningful change for people in my community and communities right around the country. Ultimately, that's what the election was about: those practical things that people knew were going to make a difference in their lives. Being representatives in this place is a huge honour, and I know each and every one of us feels that. But to be able to repay the awesome gift of being in this place and representing our communities by making meaningful policies such as this is something I'm incredibly proud of. It's one of the reasons to get up in the morning: to be a part of this team and to work extremely hard for the communities we are privileged to represent. There are a few changes in this bill, as I said. It's about reducing the overall amount of HECS debt. It's about changing the repayment system so people are paying less in each and every pay cycle and can keep more. It is also part of our broader reform package to HECS to make it fairer, to make sure students aren't penalised and to make sure more Australians can access world-class education. That's because, ultimately, pathways to education mean pathways to prosperity. They mean having social mobility. This wonderful country that we are all part of is a country of opportunity, and that is something I'm incredibly proud of. It changed my family's life and trajectory. That is why I'm so proud to support this bill, and I commend it to the House. 11:27 Ms CAMPBELL 312823 Moreton Recently I had the great pleasure of visiting the Nathan campus of the highly regarded Griffith University in my electorate of Moreton on Brisbane's south side. I asked students there a simple question: what is 20 per cent of $27,000? The responses were mixed. There was a bit of head scratching, some puzzled looks, some valiant guesses and a number of correct answers: $5,400. When I explained to the students that $5,400 is the average amount that will be cut from HELP debts based on an average debt of $27,000, they were all unanimous in their excitement. Today I rise to make a statement on the provisions of the Universities Accord (Cutting Student Debt by 20 Per Cent) Bill 2025 so that Labor can deliver its promise to the students and the graduates of Griffith University and to every student across the breadth and depth of our nation. In its first term, the Albanese Labor government acted on the need to implement reforms in education, recognising the urgency to develop a long-term plan that would make our education system both better and fairer. Labor commissioned the first review into the Australian higher education system since 2008. If we cast our minds back, 2008 was the year The Dark Knight was the highest-grossing movie, and it was the year Low, by Flo Rida, was in the charts—and I was still at university in ra-ra skirts and double Bond singlets! The review was conducted over 12 months and it resulted in the Universities Accord. The accord's purpose is to focus on the recommendations and outcomes of the review to achieve improved quality, accessibility, affordability and sustainability in higher education. The accord's final report summarises that need for modernisation of the HELP system and the need for the system to have the capacity and ability to respond to changing circumstances to support increased participation in higher education. Recommendation 16 of that final report highlights student contributions that are fairer and that better reflect the lifetime benefits students will gain from studying, as well as HELP loans that have fairer and simpler indexation and repayment arrangements. The Albanese Labor government knows that it is vital to break down the barriers to further education or training. We are committed to every Australian getting the higher education and training that they need for secure, well-paid jobs. A key part of this is Labor's commitment to making student loan programs both more affordable and fairer when it comes time to pay the loans back. This sits in absolutely stark contrast to what we have seen from those opposite. What we have seen from the Liberals is that, at every moment, at every turning point, at every decision-making opportunity, they have chosen to vote against cost-of-living measures that will give people who need it the most the support that they need at an incredibly tough time. In this tough time, it is those across the aisle who have said that said student debt should not be cut, pracs should not be paid and TAFE should not be free. This is the difference between a Labor government and a Liberal-National or Liberal government. Over 26,000 people in my electorate of Moreton have an outstanding HELP debt. That is nearly 20 per cent of my electorate. The average amount owed on those debts is $31,000. This legislation will help every single one of those people. Cutting student debt was an election promise, and the Albanese government is delivering. The Prime Minister has said from the outset that this is a government that is about delivering on the commitments that it has made. In the weeks since, we have seen over and over again us delivering on the commitments that we made at the election. This bill helps make the HELP system fairer and firmly focuses on easing those cost-of-living pressures that are so critical right now. During the campaign, we promised that this would be our first order of business. It will deliver a debt cut to over three million Australians—those with a student loan debt as at 1 June this year. This is direct cost-of-living relief. It is relief that hits the hip pocket. Less to pay back means people having more choice on how to spend their income. This $3 million includes the almost 280,000 students in the vocational education and training sector. This cohort alone will see half a billion dollars of student debt cut from their vocational education and training student loans and Australian apprentice support loans. We are lucky enough in my local electorate to house the largest trade training centre in the entire Southern Hemisphere. It is TAFE Queensland's SkillsTech at Acacia Ridge. I recently took the Deputy Prime Minister there. While we were there, we had the great opportunity to meet carpenters, people who will build the homes of the future, the homes that we so desperately need. This is what's making sure that we have reduced barriers to student debt is all about. It's not just about addressing cost of living; it's also about investing in the skills that we need to drive our nation forward and to deliver those critical promises, like on housing, that the Albanese government has committed to. The total amount of student debt wiped is around $16 billion. I mentioned earlier how excited the students of Griffith University were to learn about receiving a 20 per cent cut to their HELP debt. They were also relieved. They were relieved because, for the majority of students, the prospect of paying off a large debt once they have graduated is daunting. The impact that this debt can have on their capacity to borrow money for other reasons, such as housing, can be discouraging. This legislation also raises the minimum amount that you have to earn before you need to start pay offing your debt. It is increasing from $54,435 in the 2024-25 FY to $67,000 in 2025-26. After this bill is passed, people will only have to pay a percentage of the part of their income that is above the minimum repayment threshold. This is a reform that not only directly responds to recommendation 16 of the Universities Accord final report; it's also a reform that will have a significant impact on people who are just entering the workforce. I know from speaking to people with HELP debt on Brisbane's south side that they have too often encountered difficulties with accessing financial loans. In February this year the Treasurer requested banking regulators review that system. APRA and ASIC have now concluded this process, and it is more positive news for those with student debt. APRA is now advising banks to remove HELP debt from debt-to-income reporting, and ASIC has amended its regulatory guidance, signifying that HELP debts are different to other forms of debt, as the repayment amounts are dictated by an individual's income. These measures will assist those with student loan debt to access critical finance for things like housing. As the child of two teachers I know how important education is. Labor is the party of education. The government's achievements in education in its first term speak to that. Labor has implemented reforms in the early childhood education and care sector, in primary and secondary education and throughout the tertiary education sector. At every stage of education, it is Labor that's investing. From January this year we've expanded the fee-free uni-ready courses which support even more students from disadvantaged backgrounds to access university. Around 68,000 nursing, midwifery, teaching and social work students now receive a payment for their compulsory pracs thanks to Labor. Free TAFE has inspired 650,000 enrolments across Australia, and 170,000 courses have been completed. These newly qualified workers will become the backbone of our workforce and the lifeblood of our economy. I am proud that in my first two weeks in this place our focus has been on taking action on the cost of living and driving the Albanese Labor government's education agenda with 20 per cent off student debt. I will finish with the words of a constituent and current Griffith University student, who told me, 'I'm so happy about getting 20 per cent off HELP; I'm less stressed about money and I'm less stressed about post-grad study that I want to do.' Breaking down barriers to further education; supporting our nation to grow and prosper; and building a better and fairer education system benefits us all. Today we will leave a lasting legacy for our students of tomorrow. 11:37 Ms PAYNE 144732 Canberra Yesterday this parliament delivered on a promise we made to students, to young people, to workers retraining for the future and to every Australian who took on a student loan and pursued an opportunity. This bill, the Universities Accord (Cutting Student Debt by 20 Per Cent) Bill 2025, is the first piece of legislation that was introduced into the 48th Parliament, just as the Prime Minister said it would be, and I am so proud that this was a key priority for us in the new parliament. This bill is about fairness; it's about making our student loan system more just, more affordable and more humane; and it's only happening because the Australian people put their faith in the Albanese Labor government on 3 May. More than three million Australian will see their student debts cut by 20 per cent overnight, and this includes 22,126 people in my electorate of Canberra. For someone with an average student debt, which is now around $27,600, that's a reduction of over $5,520. For someone with a $50,000 HELP debt that's $10,000 wiped away. That's a real relief for young people who feel like the system was working against them. Canberra is a university town. My electorate is home to five university campuses, and this bill will make a huge difference to the students who have studied in Canberra's universities, who are now contributing to our local economy as graduates. Importantly, this cut will be backdated to 1 June this year, before indexation kicked in. We know how much anxiety the annual indexation of HELP debts caused for students and graduates across the country. That's why this year our government capped indexation so that it will never outpace wage growth again. This is so important. This legislation goes even further. We are fundamentally reshaping how the repayments work. Under the current system, once you've earnt above the threshold—currently just $54,435—you start paying a percentage of your entire income. That can be punishing. For someone earning just over the threshold, it's like falling off a cliff. We are raising the minimum repayment threshold to $67,000 next year and indexing it to wages. Repayments will be based on what you earn above that threshold, not your entire income. That's a fairer, more progressive system. Let me give one example. Right now, someone earning $70,000 pays around $1,750 a year in HELP repayments. Under our changes, that same person will pay around $450, a saving of $1,300 every single year. That's money for rent, for groceries and for saving for a home. That's the kind of relief that we need in a cost-of-living crunch. This is not just a Canberra issue, but it matters deeply to my community. We are home to a large number of public servants, early career professionals and students—many of them carrying student loan debts—and it's something they talk to me about often. This bill will lift that weight. It's also a boost for women, who are more likely to take time out of paid work and more likely to carry their student debts for longer. And it isn't just about uni students. These reforms also apply to vocational education students and some apprentices. Labor values education in all its forms, not just what happens in lecture theatres, but in TAFE, in trade schools and on job sites. These reforms are just one part of a broader coherent vision for higher education. We've locked free TAFE into law, with more than 650,000 enrolments so far. We've introduced paid prac placements for teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work students. We've expanded FEE-FREE Uni Ready courses to give more people, especially those from disadvantaged backgrounds, a pathway to university, and we've established an independent Australian Tertiary Education Commission to drive long-term reform and equity across the sector. Finally, we've listened to young Australians and first-home buyers, who told us that student debt was locking them out of the property market. That's why the Treasurer worked with APRA and ASIC to ensure that HELP debts are treated fairly in loan assessments. Income-contingent loans should never have been treated like other loans when applying for a mortgage. When you apply for a mortgage, lenders assess how much you can borrow by calculating your debt-to-income ratio. This ratio compares your total debts to your income, affecting your borrowing capacity. This is obviously a sensible to do because we don't want people borrowing money they can't afford to pay back, but unlike credit card debt or personal loans HELP repayments depend solely on your income, not the outstanding loan amount or interest rates. This means that HELP doesn't behave like traditional debt. It's income contingent and doesn't fluctuate in response to changes in the cash rate. We've changed the rules so that HELP debts don't impact mortgage serviceability assessments—no more punishing people for taking on debt to improve their future income chances. I had one particular constituent raise this issue with me before this change was made. It was something I raised with the Treasurer. I actually saw her the other night, and she has been able to be approved for a loan. She hadn't been able to before that because of her substantial HELP debt, so this is really making a difference to people's lives. We believe in a society where education is not a privilege for a few but a right for all, where no-one is held back because of their postcode or their bank balance. Those opposite have called this bill elitist—what a load of rubbish. It just shows their attitude to universities and higher education, which they do so consistently. Young people have consistently told us that they feel the system is stacked against the. It costs far more to get into the property market. Degrees cost significantly more due to the policies of those opposite when they were in government. This bill is about letting those young people know that we hear them. We see them. They are the future of this nation. This bill delivers fairness, it delivers opportunity, and, as I've said, it delivers relief to over 22,000 people in my electorate. I've paid off a HECS debt too, and I remember the pressure that that put on me as a young person and the concern that I had about whether I would ever be able to save for a home et cetera. I'm lucky that when I was at university the debts were nothing compared to what they are these days. When I talk to young people, I can really understand their concern about the huge debts that they are now incurring when they study. Back in 2008 when I was a researcher at NATSEM I actually authored a report on HECS and the impact it was having on young people, called What price the clever country? As part of that, I had the great opportunity to work with Professor Bruce Chapman, the architect of HECS. He created this scheme, always envisaging it as a fair and equitable scheme. It was more about allowing the opportunity for more people to study and be able to pay the loan back in an equitable manner. I know that he is very welcoming of these changes because, even back then in 2008, he had concerns about the way the HECS system was going, that it wasn't delivering in the fair and equitable way that it was originally designed to do and that it had lost its way in many senses. It actually is a system that enables people who have studied. As our report back then showed, this does on average have a significant impact on improving lifetime incomes. But that shouldn't mean that it's absolutely crippling to pay back debts as a young person when you are trying to establish your career, your life outside of work and what that might mean for your ability to enter the housing market or consider things like starting a family. I know that Bruce Champman welcomed these changes, and these are excellent changes. I'm excited that we are doing this with urgency as part of a new government and excited about what this will mean for the young people in my electorate and all around the country. 11:46 Mr MATT SMITH 312393 Leichhardt I rise to speak on the provisions of the Universities Accord (Cutting Student Debt by 20 Per Cent) Bill 2025. I support this bill. The people I know support this bill. From the huge amount of doorknocking I did in my community, I can say clearly that the people who put me here support this bill. The only people I've heard not supporting it are those opposite. I'm pleased to say the bill is going through. If I'm to go out on a limb I will say this is a great day for the over three million Australians who are going to see their HECS debt reduced by 20 per cent. It is a great day for the 17,000 people in my own electorate who are going to see their bill reduced by 20 per cent. The regions know that when you train people at home they stay at home. Cairns is home to two world class universities, JCU and CQU, and this change will enable young people to get the education they want and stay close to home and also give us the services and skills in the regions that we need to prosper. This is nation building, this is region building and this is a fantastic initiative that is going to make a world of difference to my electorate of Leichhardt. This bill is also the delivery of a promise. I'm proud to be part of a government that delivers on its promises. The Prime Minister said this would be the first bill to be introduced to the House, and indeed it was. This is my first speech on a bill, and I'm proud that it is this one. The average student debt is over $27,000—weighing people down, an albatross around their neck. These people are teachers, nurses and allied health workers. We are removing that albatross. We are giving them room to breathe. When you are not feeling financial strain, everything in your life gets that little bit easier. I was fortunate. I never got a HECS debt, but a lot of people I know did. A lot of people in this House probably have a HECS debt or know somebody with a HECS debt—their children, perhaps. My good friend Ash Constable came to Cairns from Ballarat, tried out with the Taipans, became a teacher, did his university up there and stayed. You teach them there, they stay there. I remember talking to him way back when, before the campaign, before there was any thought, and he said: 'I can't do it, mate. I want to buy a house, but every time I check my HECS debt, it's going up further than I'm paying off. I can't get a loan. I can't get in front of anybody.' He's working. He's got his girlfriend, Jas, and they want to start their lives They want to get that house. They want to get that dog. They were just stuck. He was spinning his wheels as he watched his debt go up and up and up. This changes this for Ash. The APRA changes, which allow him to get a home loan without HECS and HELP being taken into account, changed it for him. I'm happy to report to the House that he now has his house and his dog Ziggy and he and Jas are able to start their lives together in a beautiful suburb of Cairns. This is a success story; this is what is made possible by the Australian Labor government. It's not just for Ash. All up this bill will cut student debt by more than $16 billion. That's a lot less sleepless nights for those young people. The legislation makes clear that this cut will be backdated to June 2025, before this year's indexation has been accrued, and this policy will help uni students, vocational education students and some apprentices. The bill will also make important structural changes to the way this system works. It raises the minimum amount you earn before you have to start making repayments from $54,435 to $67,000. To the students I see in the gallery, it's going to make your futures easier. You'll earn more before you have to start paying back. It also replaces the current system with a new marginal repayment system. The current system is based on your entire income. Once you earn above the minimum repayment threshold of $54,435, you pay a percentage of your entire wage as your repayment. Under this bill, you'll only pay a percentage of your wage above the minimum repayment threshold. For example, if you earn $70,000, you'll pay $1,750 a year. Under our changes, you'll only pay $450. That's roughly $1,300 back into your pocket. That's $1,300 that you can spend on going out to dinner and that makes you less afraid of the electricity bill or when the car inevitably breaks down as it does in those first few years out of university. Last year the government wiped $3 billion of HELP debt from the fixed system so the indexation of HELP debts can never increase faster than wages. From 1 July 2025, the Labor government has established a Commonwealth prac payment to provide up to about 68,000 eligible teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work students payments while they are completing their compulsory practical training at TAFE and university. Fee-free TAFE has become law, and over 680,000 enrolments have occurred across the country with 170,000 of those courses already completed. When I visit TAFEs in Far North Queensland, I hear from the potential nurses how grateful they are for that. A lot of them are starting education mature in life. They've got children; they've got mortgages; they've got rents. This is really helping them along and is putting more nurses in our hospitals. The Labor government has also established the independent Australian Tertiary Education Commission to drive reform of Australia's tertiary education sector. The changes to which universities are funded will start from 2026 and will help more people from the outer suburbs and the regions get a chance to go to university and provide them with support they need to get their degrees. As I've said, we've made it easier for students to get into the housing market. My friend the Treasurer delivered on this. It has made a world of difference. Young people can see the light. They feel the pressure released from their shoulders. It is reasonable that the banks omit HELP debt from a serviceability assessment when a borrower's expected to pay off their HELP within 12 months, and ASIC has updated all of its regulatory compliance to acknowledge that HELP debts are different from other forms of debt because the amount required is to be repaid dependent on a person's level of income. This is a valuable change. It makes sense, it makes the system fairer and it helps our young people have a future. As Minister Clare has said multiple times, young people don't always see something for them on the ballot paper, but this time they did because we listened. This is what Labor parties have done and will continue to do—listen to the people and provide support for the people who want to improve themselves through education and improve their lives for their families. From go to whoa, this Labor government has supported the full Gonski, from early childhood education right the way through to university and vocational training. There is not one part of your life as a student and becoming educated that has not been improved by this Labor government. I know that there will be many people in my electorate today who are pleased by the passing of this bill. They are relieved by the passing of this bill. Future students will now understand that HECS and HELP debts are not going to be a barrier to them going to university or TAFE or furthering their education. I am very proud to commend this bill to the House. 11:54 Ms RYAN 249224 Lalor Deputy Speaker Chesters, it's a pleasure to be here and to see you in that chair. Labor is the party of education. Labor is the party of aspiration. I'm pleased to rise on the Universities Accord (Cutting Student Debt by 20 Per Cent) Bill 2025 that addresses both of those things. I support this legislation, the first bill introduced in this new parliament, because it delivers on the promise made to Australians. The bill goes to the heart of Labor's mission—fairness, relief and restoring faith in the power of education. It is Labor's safety net in action not just for today but for a better, fairer Australia tomorrow. As someone who spent over two decades in schools as a teacher, a principal and a proud public educator, I understand how crucial it is that education remains an opportunity and that all hindrances are removed and all impediments to having people engage in education are addressed. It is important that higher education not become a trap. The bill in front of us wipes 20 per cent off existing student debts across HELP, VET Student Loans, Apprenticeship Support Loans and others. It delivers $16 billion in student-debt relief for around 3 million Australians, including more than 800,000 people in Victoria, and over 18,000 in my electorate of Lalor. That's 18,000 locals who will be better off because this bill passes this place. It will provide an average reduction of $5,520 per person in student debt—and that's an average. I've met young locals who have much bigger debts than that, because they've pursued longer term agendas. That's a young couple saving for a house, a mature-age student changing careers or a family breathing a little easier. This 20 per cent cut is automatic—no red tape, no applications, just direct relief. This builds on the Labor government's earlier action to fix the broken indexation system, which wiped a further $3 billion in debt for Australians with a HECS debt. Together these reforms represent nearly $20 billion in relief—real action, not talk, to support our local people. I understand what this means for people trying to move forward. I understand what it means for young families juggling child care and repayments. I understand the peace of mind this will bring to a generation that has felt locked out. But it also goes to structural issues. This goes to the structure of the repayment system. This legislation reforms the repayment system and makes it fairer. The minimum repayment threshold will increase from $54,000 to $67,000. Simply put it means that, if you currently earn $54,000, you are required to start paying back that HECS debt. This will increase that payment threshold and only apply when you are earning $67,000. A graduate earning $70,000 will pay $1,300 less per year in repayments, because of this measure. You won't begin repaying your loan until you are earning a more sustainable income. That's fairer, that's smarter and that's a system that recognises the real pressures Australians are facing. It especially supports women, carers and part-time workers—those who've often borne the brunt of unfair systems. This bill goes to the heart of who we are as a nation and what we aspire for our young people. It's about who we back and about who we believe in. It will especially help younger Australians, with around 70 per cent of people repaying a HECS debt being 35 years and younger. My electorate of Lalor is one of the youngest in the country, and I know how much this matters to the people I represent—not just the people with the debt but their families, their parents, who are equally concerned, as concerned as we are in this place, about what this has meant for young people getting their first housing loan. We have this piece of legislation. We also have the Treasurer's actions with the banks to ensure that that is changing. On election night, a student who helped on the campaign for me, came up and simply said: 'Thank you. Thank you for understanding what this means.' That moment has stayed with me. That student represents what this bill is all about. It's about hope, it's about access and it's about fairness. From Whitlam establishing universal higher education in 1974, through Hawke's and Dawkins's reforms and to today, Labor has delivered access and equity across generations. This bill continues that legacy. As a former educator, I know that education transforms lives. I've taught kids whose parents never finished school. I've sat with students at 3.30 pm on a Friday, watching them weigh up work, study and survival. I understand the barriers that exist and I know that education is a ladder—and it's always been Labor that builds the rungs on that ladder, making sure no-one is left behind. I take a moment to say that this bill works in conjunction with other actions taken by this government. I want to celebrate for a moment one of the things that the Albanese Labor government has done—and that something was really important in my electorate. The fact is that Pacific Islander students in my electorate were blocked from—had impediments put in front of them—being able to access HECS. They had no pathway to citizenship. I taught generations of Pacific Islander kids whose aspirations were dashed because they couldn't see a pathway to higher education in this country. This government has created that pathway to citizenship. This government has created that pathway to allowing our young people from New Zealand to access this. This government has now given them relief on top through this budget. This bill restores confidence in our higher education system and restores the public's belief that students can enrol in higher education and that they have a government that believes in them and supports them. The Universities Accord made it clear: uncapped indexation, rising debts and confusing repayment systems were putting people off study altogether. You don't have to look very far in my community to see the impact that has had. That is no way to run a system built on and for aspiration. This bill answers that fear with fairness. We're not just cutting debt by 20 per cent; we're rewriting the rules—fixing indexation so it never grows faster than wages and introducing marginal repayments so repayments only apply to what you earn above the threshold. This is a critical point when you're looking at your options between pursuing higher education and pursuing a trade. It's a critical point, and we need those with the capacity to pursue higher education. We know we need it. We've been told how important that higher education piece is going to be into the future. Whilst Labor is delivering $16 billion in real relief to three million Australians, the opposition—those opposite—said no. They voted against wiping student debt. They voted against easing the cost-of-living burden. They voted against restoring fairness to the higher education system. At a time when Australians needed support, they chose politics over people. Labor chooses students, Labor chooses fairness, Labor chooses action and Labor chooses aspiration. This is a Labor policy. It reflects Labor values and it will be delivered by the Albanese Labor government. This bill lifts the weight off the shoulders of the very people we rely on. As the member for Lalor, I say thank you to the Minister for Education for making this our government's first priority. I thank the Prime Minister for making this commitment. I commend the bill to the House and the message it sends for three million Australians: help is here, and fairness is back, because, under Labor, education will never be a privilege for the few. It will always be a promise to all. 12:04 Mr NEUMANN HVO Blair I'm pleased to support the member for Lalor in making this statement in support the Universities Accord (Cutting Student Debt by 20 Per Cent) Bill 2025. We promised to introduce this legislation as our first order of business once parliament returned, and we've done it. It was and it remains a high priority for us—a reduction in student debt. You can tell a lot about the priorities of politicians and the political parties they represent by the number of speakers on the list. I see none from the coalition parties on the list today for statements. I'm not surprised by that, because the party of Menzies, who built universities, is the party that tries to link funding to the tertiary sector to a political agenda—to industrial relations right-wing activity. We saw that during Prime Minister Howard's time, with AWAs and Work Choices. Once again, the Liberal and National parties are absent in the area of tertiary education. They've never liked university education for working and middle-class families. They've never liked TAFE. They've done everything they can to destroy TAFE at a state level. So I'm not surprised they're not speaking on the bill. They don't mind debt reduction for big corporates, but they don't like debt reduction for students. They are not the party of aspiration and opportunity. That remains the Labor Party. I reckon, if Alfred Deakin came back today, he'd be taking a Labor Party membership ticket. He wouldn't be looking at a Liberal Party, free-trader or protectionist ticket, I can tell you. We're about making sure that aspiration and opportunity are supported. By cutting all student debt by 20 per cent as a one-off, we're helping more than three million Australian students and graduates across Australia. We're making it easier for students and graduates who are starting off their careers to raise their family, juggle a mortgage, save for a home, rent a better place or have a holiday. We want to make sure that they get cost-of-living relief, and that remains top of our agenda. This bill amends a number of pieces of legislation, including the Higher Education Support Act of 2003. It's delivering on our commitment to make the Higher Education Loan Program, or HELP, and other income-contingent student programs fairer, more affordable and more accessible. The particular legislation we introduced last week provided a one-off 20 per cent reduction in HELP and other student loan debts—provided under student loan acts—that were incurred on or before 1 June 2025. That will wipe out about $16 billion in student debt for more than three million Australians. In my electorate, that's 23,149 local students and graduates across Ipswich, the Somerset region and the Karana Downs area in Blair. They'll see a reduction in their HECS or HELP debt. It will help current students as well as hardworking nurses, teachers and tradies who are out there contributing to the local economy. Based on Australian Taxation Office figures, the average student debt in Blair is $24,403, so they'll see about $5,520 wiped from those outstanding student loans. That's a massive, massive difference to people in my electorate. That's help with the cost of living. It's real help—less debt and more money in your pocket, not the government's. I have spoken to numerous people who rang me after the election, who have seen me at mobile offices or country shows where I'm doing mobile offices, or who spoke to me at prepoll or on election day who said this policy really attracted them. We have two University of Southern Queensland campuses in my electorate, in Ipswich and in Springfield. These changes will make a difference to students who attend universities there. As an aside, some will recall in this place that, on 1 June, student debts were indexed. However, the government has backdated these debts to before indexation was applied. We're seeing that people with student debts get the full benefit of the 20 per cent cut. Our No. 1 focus as a government is to continue to deliver cost-of-living relief for Australians. I should stress these cuts for student debts are not just aimed at university students; they reduce debt for all Australians with student debts, including not just HELP debts but debts from vocational education and training, or VET, student loans; Australian apprenticeship support loans; student startup loans; and other student loans as well. We know they can be a barrier for people to get into the workforce, get into the home they want and have that holiday they feel they need. The bill will deliver cost-of-living relief to almost 280, 000 students in the VET sector, cutting $½ billion of student debt from this group alone, many of whom attend TAFE campuses across Queensland, including the campus at Bundamba in my electorate of Blair. This is a huge help for students attending TAFE Queensland campuses not just in Ipswich at Bundamba but in Springfield as well. Our government is focused on reducing the barriers to further study and training so every student can get the skills they need for a well-secured and well-paid job. It's worth noting that Universities Australia has welcomed the government's legislation. That's why it's such a mystery, by the way, that the coalition opposed this policy and why, in opposition now, they remain so diffident, if not difficult, about this policy. In addition to cutting student debt by 20 per cent, the legislation raises the minimum amount before people have to start making repayments from $54,435 in 2024-25 to $67,000 in 2025-26. This will grow in line with wages growth, which will reduce minimum repayments. By the way, this reminds me of the TSMIT argument on immigration. For nearly 10 years, those opposite didn't raise the temporary skill migration income threshold, and workers were exploited and paid lower rates of wage until we increased it initially to about $67,000. The figures have a certain resemblance, and it does remind me about the fact that those opposite would never ever be interested in increasing people's wages. As a result of what we're doing, someone earning $70,000 will see their minimum payments reduced by about $1,300 a year. The bill introduces a new marginal repayment system, where compulsory student loan repayments are calculated on just the income above the $67,000 threshold, rather than having it based on a percentage of the repayment income or total annual income, and it makes it fairer to be honest with you. It means that you start paying off your university degree when university starts paying off for you, really. Importantly, it was recommended by key experts and stakeholders, namely the Universities Accord and the architect of the HECS income contingent loans system, the eminent economist Professor Bruce Chapman. When we announced the reform to create a new marginal repayments system, Professor Chapman said it was, 'The most important thing that happened to the system in 30 years.' That's how he described it. It's a marginal collection; it's much gentler and much fairer than previously. We should have done it years ago. He is another expert that those opposite don't want to listen to. They don't want to listen to science or to educators. They don't want to listen to experts at all. Professor Chapman said, 'This relief will make the system fairer by giving those on lower salaries more money in their pockets.' That's cost-of-living relief. These changes build on reforms we've done to fix the indexation formula, as I said before. It means, all up, that the Albanese Labor government will cut close to $20 billion in student debt for more than three million Australians. It's just another way the government is continuing to deliver cost-of-living relief to Australians, because getting an education shouldn't mean you've got a lifetime of debt. No matter where you live or how much your parents earn, our government will work to ensure those doors of opportunity are open to you. They were for me and my two younger brothers. We hadn't gone to university. Our parents hadn't gone to university or high school. Our grandparents hadn't gone to high school, and their grandparents hadn't gone to high school. The idea of going to high school and then university was a really new thing for my family. That has made such a big difference in the lives of my family, and I know the piece of legislation that we're talking about today will make a huge difference to working class kids in regional and rural communities like Ipswich and the Somerset region in my electorate of Blair. I commend the bill, and I'm proud to speak on this particular bill because it will make a tangible difference, a real difference, in the lives of young people and older people in my electorate. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 249710 There being no further statements, we will move onto the next item. BILLS 35 BILLS Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025 35

Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025

Report from Federation Chamber 35 12:19 The SPEAKER 53517 The question before the House is that the House agree to the second reading amendment moved by the honourable member for Hume.  

The House divided. [12:19]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

39 AYES Aldred, M. R. Batt, D. J. Bell, A. M. Birrell, S. J. Boyce, C. E. Buchholz, S. Caldwell, C. M. Chaffey, J. L. Chester, D. J. Conaghan, P. J. Gee, A. R. Hamilton, G. R. Hastie, A. W. Hawke, A. G. Hogan, K. J. Joyce, B. T. G. Kennedy, S. P. Landry, M. L. (Teller) Littleproud, D. McCormack, M. F. McIntosh, M. I. McKenzie, Z. A. O'Brien, L. S. Pasin, A. Penfold, A. L. Pike, H. J. (Teller) Price, M. L. Rebello, L. S. Small, B. J. Tehan, D. T. Thompson, P. Venning, T. H. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Webster, A. E. Willcox, A. J. Wilson, T. R. Wood, J. P. Young, T. J. 93 NOES Abdo, B. J. Albanese, A. N. Aly, A. Ambihaipahar, A. Belyea, J. A. Berry, C. G. Boele, N. Bowen, C. E. Briskey, J. L. Burke, A. S. Burnell, M. P. Burns, J. Butler, M. C. Byrnes, A. J. Campbell, J. P. Chaney, K. E. Charlton, A. H. G. Chesters, L. M. Clare, J. D. Claydon, S. C. Clutterham, C. L. Coker, E. A. Comer, E. L. Conroy, P. M. Cook, K. M. G. Cook, P. A. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. France, A. A. French, T. A. Garland, C. M. L. Georganas, S. Giles, A. J. Gorman, P. P. Gosling, L. J. Gregg, M. J. Haines, H. M. Hill, J. C. Holzberger, R. A. V. Husic, E. N. Jarrett, M. L. Jordan-Baird, M. A. M. Keogh, M. J. Khalil, P. King, C. F. King, M. M. H. Lawrence, T. N. Laxale, J. A. A. Le, D. T. 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, R. G. Moncrieff, D. S. Mulino, D. Neumann, S. K. Ng, G. J. O'Neil, C. E. Payne, A. E. Phillips, F. E. Plibersek, T. J. Rae, S. T. Reid, G. J. Repacholi, D. P. Rishworth, A. L. Roberts, T. G. Rowland, M. A. Ryan, J. C. Ryan, M. M. Scrymgour, M. R. Sharkie, R. C. C. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Smith, M. J. H. Soon, X. Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Steggall, Z. Teesdale, J. A. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Urquhart, A. E. Watson-Brown, E. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. White, R. P. Wilson, J. H. Witty, S. J. Zappia, A. 0 PAIRS

Question negatived.
Original question agreed to.
Bill read a second time.

 Third Reading 37 12:26 Mr KEOGH 249147 Burt by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. STATEMENTS 37 STATEMENTS Early Childhood Education and Care (Strengthening Regulation of Early Education) Bill 2025 37

Early Childhood Education and Care (Strengthening Regulation of Early Education) Bill 2025

12:27 Ms RYAN 249224 Lalor I rise today to speak on this legislation with a heavy heart. It's a heavy heart because I represent a corner of the world where distressing things have occurred in recent time. I represent some of the families that have been directly impacted by the events in Victoria that we've all followed so closely. I think it's incumbent upon me today to reach out to those families impacted and offer my support once again, as I have done from home, but also my thanks to the way they have responded to an incredibly challenging situation in their personal lives, in their family lives, made more acutely distressing because it's about our children. I rise to support this bill and the early action of this government to ensure that our early education and care sector ensures that centres are not putting profit before the safety of our children; working with the Minister for Education, Jason Clare, and appropriate people across our states, ensure that we find ways to make this sector as safe as possible so that families can feel assured; ensure safety is the cornerstone of our early education and child care sector; and ensure that, working with states and territories and ECEC regulatory agencies, we have sharpened our focus to ensure our priorities around safety, quality, access and affordability—those four pillars—are being met. As a member of a government which did a lot of work in the last parliament around the affordability space, supporting families to access quality early childhood education, and a lot of work around valuing our early childhood educators—something that was long, long overdue—to ensure that they are getting a fair day's pay for a fair day's work, I know the vast majority of our workers in this space are great Australians doing incredibly important work in the earliest days of a child's life. So, we are making sure that, around the country, all governments have a sharp focus to ensure that we get the pieces right to make sure that the safety and the quality—things I don't think can be separated—are working together. I want to thank our local community; I want to thank Victoria Police for the way they've managed what has been occurring; and I want to thank the Victorian health department for the way they've worked with local families. I've sat with some of the local families impacted. It has given me an insight into the catastrophic impact that this has had. I come here to talk about this piece of legislation with their goodwill, because they now understand that action will be taken to ensure that profit is never put before safety. When those centres fail to meet standards and provide a safe environment, we think those centres shouldn't operate, and we know, as the Minister for Education has said on several occasions at the dispatch box this week, that as the funder in this space we can make a direct impact by cutting off funding and by creating more power to allow for spot checks around fraud, noncompliance and safety and as a federal government we can act to create deterrents around noncompliance and incentive around quality. This is the beginning of the work, and it will continue. The legislation before us, the provisions of the Early Childhood Education and Care (Strengthening Regulation of Early Education) Bill 2025, is a critical piece of the architecture, if you like, but the work going forward is around meeting with our state and territory bodies so they can work together with the Commonwealth to find better ways to ensure that safety is what this bill sets up and allows. This bill will ensure quality and safety is a paramount consideration for maintaining CCS provider and service approval. So, in other words, if you're coming into this sector without an eye on safety and quality, don't bother. The funding will not be there to support you. The approvals will not come. The bill means providers or services which do not meet this consideration can be subject to compliance action, including having their funding cut, and it will ensure quality and safety is a paramount consideration when assessing CCS provider approval applications. This means that providers or services which do not meet this consideration can be prevented from expanding. So, in other words, if you're a bad actor in this space, in terms of ensuring that safety and quality, then you can be stopped from opening another centre and from expanding your involvement. This legislation expands the secretary's power to publicise actions taken against providers, because sunlight is, of course, the best medicine in terms of exposure. It's going to strengthen powers of entry for authorised persons to enable them to conduct unannounced service visits and spot checks, including family day care and out-of-school-hours care. These are really important provisions. The bill also supports the implementation of the CCS reform and the strong and sustainable foundations measure announced in the 2024-25 budget, which includes streamlining the process for seeking entry to an early education and care service under a monitoring warrant and appointment of an appropriately qualified and experienced expert to conduct an independent audit of a large childcare provider. It requires from 1 January 2026 that all family day care and in-home care providers collect the CCS gap fee, the out-of-pocket component of fees paid by parents, directly from families. I want to thank the Minister for Education and the new Minister for Early Education and Care, Senator Walsh from Victoria, for their work and availability, when this news broke in Victoria, to talk with me and to allow me the scope to meet with families, have important conversations with them and ensure that they felt supported in this process by their federal government. I thank their Victorian counterparts for the work that they've done in this space as well. Keeping our children safe is of paramount importance to this government, but what is critically important in that space is that marriage between safety and quality. We know it matters. I'm in childcare centres and early education centres a lot in my electorate. Representing one of the youngest communities in the country means there are many centres operating in my community, and visiting them gives me a sense of being on the ground as a pair of eyes as well in those centres, and I welcome any families that want to talk to me about the things that they might be very happy with or very unhappy with in the centres in my electorate, because there is nothing more important than this. I know that you know, Deputy Speaker Freelander, how important those first thousand days in a child's life are. We know how important early education is. We know how important the foundations of learning are, and the statistics tell us that those children who engage in early education are better prepared for school and meet their milestones more quickly. We know that these things are real. We know there is quality in having these centres. It's up to government to ensure the quality inside the centres is up to scratch. I want to thank all of those people who make a commitment every day to be an early educator for their work. I know many who live in my community who are early educators, and I want to thank them for their work. I want to thank the families for the way they have dealt with this crisis in Victoria, and I want to thank the ministers for taking action so quickly. 12:37 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina Probably nothing before the parliament today will be more important than this particular bill, the Early Childhood Education and Care (Strengthening Regulation of Early Education) Bill 2025, and I commend the member for Lalor. She is absolutely 100 per cent correct when she talks about the necessity of having the building blocks in place for children to ensure their safety is paramount. The foundation of our society is our kids, and to preserve and protect them and give them every opportunity has to be first and foremost in all our considerations. Anyone who is a parent or a grandparent, any sane thinking person—anyone at all—would be horrified in recent weeks by what has allegedly happened in Victorian childcare centres. I heard the member for Fisher talk about this yesterday in the Federation Chamber. I saw the interview Senator Duniam did on Insiders just recently in relation to this. Senator Duniam from Tasmania served on the committee on the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. He has made some very good, sound, sensible, sane comments in relation to this. I've heard the opposition leader, the member for Farrer, also express her outrage as a mum, as a grandparent and as a good person in relation to what has been reported out of Victoria. The Prime Minister spoke about it too. I was doing a television interview when the story first broke—and I know the Victorian Greens tried to make some mileage out of this—and I said this was, in the early stages, very unfair to Premier Jacinta Allan and her initial reaction and what she has put in place in that state to respond to these dreadful allegations. The Early Childhood Education and Care (Strengthening Regulation of Early Education) Bill 2025 amends the A New Tax System (Family Assistance) (Administration) Act 1999 to prioritise quality and safety considerations when assessing whether providers can receive the Commonwealth's childcare subsidy. It also expands powers to publicise actions taken against providers, and it enables authorised officers to conduct unannounced service visits and spot checks. In the main, that's what this bill will do. As Leader of the Opposition Ley has said, when there is good legislation or sound policy being brought forward, the coalition will support it. The coalition will certainly support any measure, any provision, to protect children; it absolutely will. The bill also includes additional administrative matters. If we go through the particular points I just mentioned, whether providers can receive the very generous subsidies provided federally to continue their operations is of paramount importance, because if they're not doing the right thing—in any way, shape or form—then they shouldn't be providing child care. In a cost-of-living crisis—in a modern, functioning society—there are often two-parent families going out and needing to work to bring home the money to be able to afford to live, to be able to afford to provide the best lifestyles for their children. Single-parent families—whatever the case may be, families need to have child care. In rural, regional and, particularly, remote Australia it's not so much affordability of child care; it's availability of child care. There's a childcare desert, but that is another matter entirely. Parents need to be absolutely certain that the childcare centres that we have are going to look after their children and that their children are going to be happy and healthy in those carers' care. When they drop them off in the morning, or whatever the case may be, and they pick them up in the afternoon they need to know that that child has been looked after. As a parent and as a grandparent I know how important this is. I know how much my daughter and son are going to need child care in the future for their children, and I know that, certainly, when they do drop their children off they expect to be able to have that child looked after 100 per cent, every bit as well and as good as they would look after that child. In the main, our childcare providers, our childcare carers, do an amazing and remarkable job. They love children. They do the right thing by those kids. When you have incidents such as this one out of Victoria recently it is absolutely beyond words. Unfortunately, it's not an isolated case. As bad as it is and as widespread as it seems to be according to the police reports, there have been other allegations of dreadful activities taking place in childcare settings. We know about Operation Tenterfield in August 2023, where a Queensland man was charged and later convicted of 1,623 child abuse offences against 91 children in Brisbane, in Sydney and overseas over a five-year period up to 2022. Words absolutely fail me sometimes—when you think about what sort of mind, what sort of man, what sort of evil monster this person is. They should never, ever see the light of day again. I'm sorry, but they just shouldn't be let out of any prison facility. That's where they belong, and that's where they should spend the rest of their natural lives. I'm not a judge, I'm not a magistrate, but I think people expect that there's no coming back from where that person's mind is despite whatever rehabilitation they might receive in the king's pleasure, as it was once called. They do not deserve to be let out. Elsewhere, we've had reports and investigations. We've had all these sorts of things, but the time for talk is over. The Commonwealth will do whatever it can, in the provisions that it has at its disposal, to work with state and local authorities to make sure that our children's safety is first and foremost and to make sure that kids are well looked after. As the Leader of the Opposition said, child safety is above politics. She's absolutely right. I know the Prime Minister, a person of good heart, understands that as well. I was just speaking to him in the corridor then about any number of topics and he, too—like any parent, any politician and any normal person—is appalled about what has transpired in Victoria. We are unwavering in our support for the changes, which better protect children in care settings. We have to give confidence to the one million families who rely on child care. You could imagine the angst, the anguish, the heartache and the not knowing of those parents whose children are now having to undergo checks and medical procedures. What effect does that have on those children? Maybe some of them will be too young to know. But others will have recurring flashbacks to what should have been a happy childhood. I think that kids in our society are growing up too quickly. I believe that the measures being put in place by this government to ban social media for under-16s is a good thing. People can bleat until the cows come home about whatever they think about that, but I think we are expecting our children to grow up much too quickly. I heard the member for Fisher in the Federation Chamber talking about the proliferation of pornography, which is just a few clicks away for kids as young as eight who are then able to access dreadful images online. This bill allows three things. They are to financially penalise providers, allow name-and-shame provisions and enable authorised officers to conduct unannounced visits. That is a good thing. 12:47 Mr GEE 261393 Calare I wish to make a brief contribution to the debate regarding this issue. I wish it to be known that I support this bill, the Early Childhood Education and Care (Strengthening Regulation of Early Education) Bill 2025. The alleged crimes that have been committed against vulnerable children, as well as the ongoing investigations, have shocked communities around our country. The perpetrators of these horrific crimes must be brought to justice. I'm supporting this bill because it strengthens the Commonwealth's regulatory and enforcement powers to impose safety and quality outcomes in early education. I think it's important that we support any measure that can improve child safety. We must be doing it in this House. So I commend the bill to the House. As a sidenote to my comments, I note that votes have already taken place on the last two pieces of legislation I have spoken on; my speeches have occurred after the votes. I know the government has a very strong majority in this House, but we need to be respecting the processes of the parliament. That means that we should be having debates where all members get an opportunity to have their say, and then we vote. That is what the public expect. They don't want to see votes taking place and then members merely making statements after the fact. I think it is important to note that there is a community expectation that those processes be adhered to and respected in accordance with the traditions of this parliament. Having said that, I believe that this bill does make an important contribution to child safety and should be supported by all members. So, for those reasons, I commend the bill to the House. BILLS 40 BILLS Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) (Repeal) Bill 2025 40

Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) (Repeal) Bill 2025

Report from Federation Chamber 40 Third Reading 40 12:50 Ms WHITE 224102 Lyons by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. BUSINESS 40 BUSINESS Rearrangement 40 12:51 Mr KEOGH 249147 Burt I move: That government business order of the day No. 8 be called on immediately. Question agreed to. BILLS 40 BILLS Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Penalty and Overtime Rates) Bill 2025 40

Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Penalty and Overtime Rates) Bill 2025

Second Reading 40 12:52 Mr TIM IMW Goldstein WILSON () (): We're back here again talking about the importance of penalty rates and this legislation, the Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Penalty and Overtime Rates) Bill 2025, that the government simply doesn't want to hear the voices of Australian small business on. Deputy Speaker Freelander, you may recall only a few moments ago we had a division in this chamber because we wanted to send this legislation off to a committee inquiry. We then had the Leader of the House, the ultimate in bluster, come into this chamber and make an excuse about why this legislation should never see the light of day from the perspective and the input of the small businesses of this nation. His argument was allegedly that the motion we put forward referring it to a committee was inaccurate because there had been a change in the title of the committee. That was his magnificent, intelligent, insightful contribution. There's just one problem. The changes to the titles haven't actually been printed yet. According to the Clerk of this House, he is wrong and it would have been justified, and there would have been an inquiry had it passed. So what the Leader of the House did in this place was use bluster and bluff to once again convince those on the other side of a justification about why Australians should not have input into legislation that affects them and directly impacts small businesses across this country. There's one reason they're doing this. It's that they can't tell anybody what the impact of this legislation will be on small business across the country. When we had our briefing with the minister, we asked for simple information since Labor had gone on this pathway of introducing its legislative victory lap. We asked simple questions: You're proposing new legislation that directly undermines the independence of the Fair Work Commission. So, tell us now, Minister, when we can see the regulatory impact statement. 'Well, there isn't one.' So we asked another question: how many small businesses in Australia will be impacted as a consequence of this legislation? 'Ah, we don't know.' In fact, as I said in the other debate, they are taking the three-monkey approach—hear no small business, see no small business, speak to no small business—because they have no interest in understanding the consequences, because they are simply engaging in their legislative victory. It's extraordinary, frankly, how much the minister has stuffed this process up. If you think about this legislation, their claim is that there has been this great threat to penalty rates, when that side of the chamber supports penalty rates and this side of the chamber supports penalty rates. I do concede that I haven't canvassed the views of the crossbench and the Independents—or the corporate funded Independents—but I'm willing to bet that they're not kicking up a stink about this, as far as I'm aware; I might be wrong. So, we have about 95 per cent of the entire parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia in support of penalty rates, but apparently they're under threat. It's a pretty amazing claim, but we know the history of the Labor Party in finding pathways to run scare campaigns on the community. They are quite effective at it; you've got to give them credit where credit's due and respect your opponents for the skills they have. They ran a scare campaign because the retail industry of Australia said, 'We want to pay workers more so we can make it simpler, easier and fairer.' The assumption of the Australian Labor Party is that every retail outlet in this country—the local milk bar, the local bookshop—has this massive HR department sitting behind them, and they go over these legislative tomes bit by bit to understand: we're going to employ somebody who's going to pick up dishes, or shelve a book, during the minutes and the seconds of different times of day, but the rates should be different depending on whether they're washing the dishes or working at the checkout. So, if you shelve a book it's one price; if you swipe it through the swiping machine it's a different price. If you wash a dish it's one price; if you lay it on the table in front of somebody who has ordered the dish it's a different price. I don't know about you, but that sounds like the definition of insanity to me. You don't need to take my opinion for it. You just need to look at—I don't know—the government department that is legally responsible for oversighting policy and employment law in this nation. Even they can't figure it out, so much so that they have short-changed their own employees. When the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations in Australia cannot figure out how to pay people under Labor's laws, then perhaps—I've got a funny feeling—the laws aren't that clear; they're a bit complex. And maybe for someone who's just set up a small business—at a strip shopping centre, or working from home, or maybe they rented out a warehouse and are moving stock, or are running a digital business online and want to employ people—it's not their core focus, the details of this, that and the other and the regulations and everything else. It's not their focus. The laws are a bit complex, and they're not getting it right. So—shock, horror!—some people say, 'Actually, it's cheaper to pay workers more than it is to pay an army of lawyers, accountants and all these other people to seek advice, because I'd rather that the people who work for me be happier and have better outcomes.' Funnily enough, the Fair Work Commission has come along sometimes and said, 'Actually, that makes a lot of sense.' They're not in the business—well, they shouldn't be, anyway—of making accountants and lawyers richer. They certainly shouldn't be. Their practice and purpose should be making sure Australians get paid well for the work they do as part of lifting the Australian economy. But you can just imagine it: alright, Labor's been elected. We all accept it. It is what it is. They've got 94 seats. You're flooding over to the other side of the parliament, with the egos that go with it. They've gone over and succeeded in getting elected. Here it is—we're now passing a piece of legislation to stop workers getting paid more. It's an interesting revelation. Then, of course, last Thursday, the Prime Minister wanted his great victory lap day where it was all going to be about penalty rates, and he was going to be doing a little 'whoop, whoop' around this chamber and out in the public square, doing press conferences. They had the people as props for exactly the argument they wanted to run. What happened? We asked simple, reasonable questions of the minister: What's the regulatory impact statement? How many small businesses are going to be impacted? What's the consultation process? Now we've asked this outrageous thing, 'Can we have an inquiry in the House of Representatives?' The answer, by the way—the decision of parliament and the Labor government—was no. They chose to silence and censor small business as part of this process. So you can imagine the Prime Minister, who just wanted this perfect outcome, but, all of a sudden, the media went, 'Actually, that's an entirely reasonable question—where is the regulatory impact statement?' and the minister, then said, 'Well, we haven't got one.' The media said: 'It's an entirely reasonable question. What are the impacts on all the small businesses in the country?' Of course, it's a simple point. There are no penalty rates on jobs that don't exist, and, when you've got record business insolvencies and rising unemployment, it's this little point. Of course, what would have happened is they wanted to do that little 'whoop, whoop' victory lap around this chamber and say, 'We've done this, we've saved it.' We know the rhetoric. I love a bit of rhetoric myself, but the Prime Minister loves it more. He doesn't have the equivalent of a card, but maybe we'll get a card that he'll flash around the chamber for this purpose. Let's wait and see; you never know. The prop, even though we're not allowed to use them, pops up every now and again. But you can just imagine in the PMO that the Prime Minister is sitting there, and he just wants to have his moment in the sun. All of a sudden, the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry says: This change is a backwards step and out of touch with the realities of a modern economy … This bill is at odds with the government's plans to improve productivity, and instead injects more rigidity and complexity into the Fair Work laws. That's not an endorsement, even though we were told there was all this consultation and everybody was on board. Then, of course, the Australian Industry Group came out and said: This is badly drafted legislation that is going to make it harder for employers to employ people who want to work when it suits them. All of a sudden, we're undermining wages and we're undermining people's capacity for workplace flexibility, things like mums being able to go and pick up kids from school and dads going to pick up kids from school in between their workplace arrangements, which is something I certainly always support. The Australian Industry Group continued: It will reduce avenues for lifting productivity when we're about to convene a Roundtable on how to lift it. You know that thing the Treasurer, who sits over there somewhere on the other side of the chamber, keeps going on about? He keeps going on about how important productivity is because we've got to increase standards of living—a point I agree with—but the Australian Industry Group is now saying: 'No, we're calling you on that one. That's not going to happen because of this type of legislation, particularly the sloppy drafting of the minister.' Then, you have the Australian Retailers Association. They come out and say: 'It would remove flexibility in wage negotiations and introduce additional costs, complexities and administrative pressures. Retailers argue that many workers prefer consistent, reliable income rather than complex penalty structures and modern agreements that could include higher base pay and offer stability and simplicity without sacrificing take-home pay.' Okay. We've now got ACCI, the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry; the Australian Industry Group; and now the Australian Retailers Association saying this law doesn't actually achieve what they say it's going to achieve. Then, of course, the Minerals Council—the industry that actually creates wealth for the country—says: The government's changes will reduce productivity and compromise Australia's competitiveness in global export markets. The laws are also becoming a decisive material factor in whether new projects proceed or not, and whether billions of dollars in investment capital is invested in Australia or elsewhere. So it undermines growth, undermines workers, undermines independence, undermines flexibility and, of course, has sloppy drafting. We're at the point where the Prime Minister's probably sitting around in his little bunker over there in the ministerial wing. He picks up the phone to the minister, (02)6277—I can't remember the rest of the numbers for the minister's phone—and says: 'Hey, Minister, this isn't going well. Why is this law, that we thought we had an electoral mandate to just smash out, not going the way we thought it would?' And, of course, the minister would say: 'Well, you know, Prime Minister, we drafted the laws; we're doing what our scare campaign was intended to do. We're just bringing it into effect. We're doing exactly what you wanted us to do.' But the Prime Minister asks a simple question: 'Where's the regulatory impact statement, Minister? It's a simple question the media's asking us, and you can't answer it.' 'Well, Prime Minister, we didn't do one.' The Prime Minister is, of course, going to turn around and say, 'Well, what about this question of small businesses? How many small businesses are going to be impacted? Surely you know the answer. This is what I put you in the job for!' Of course, the minister would have to respond and say, 'Well, hang on, Prime Minister'—I'm on hold, Deputy Speaker. And then she'll come back and say: 'We didn't actually check. We didn't check how many millions of Australian small businesses might be impacted by these laws, how many might be exposed or at risk or go under.' The Prime Minister, not unreasonably, would turn around and say, 'Minister, I don't think you're on top of your job.' I think it's even worse than that. You're the Prime Minister and you're sitting there saying, 'And why are they saying the legislation's poorly drafted and sloppy?' 'We haven't actually done the work.' This is at the point where—you know sometimes when some people just hang up because it's easier than having to answer a difficult question? I think that's the point at which the minister would have just hung up. I get why. It would have been difficult. You have people saying it's sloppy legislation, poorly drafted and isn't going to have the desired effect. It will actually undermine workers. And this is the legislation that we, as a parliament, are now being asked to consider. It's even worse than that because of course we then, as the opposition—actually in a very constructive way—come into this chamber and say: 'You know you've got that committee that does inquiries into things like laws around employment? You changed the name of it, but it still exists. It existed in the last parliament; it exists in this one. Can we do a little inquiry to tidy up the neat little problems you've got with your legislation and your sloppy drafting?' We then went through the hoopla. We had the Leader of the House come in. He blustered and he bluffed and everybody laughed and it was all very entertaining for the 94 government members of the House, because half of it's a confidence game. You've got to show there's not actually a problem when there's actually a very serious problem. Anyway, we got there. They voted against an inquiry; they voted to silence and shut out the small businesses of this country. Well, we're now being asked to vote on legislation that I don't think this government has any confidence in. I don't think the government has any confidence in their minister. This is like day one basically, or week one effectively, of the government actually getting on with its agenda. If this is where we are now, it's a pretty poor sign of things to come. Australians need confidence in laws around workplace relations and employment now more than ever. We are now at an impasse where there is legislation before the parliament; industry is saying it's not going to do the job it's designed to do; we all support penalty rates; we have the minister not really confident that her legislation is up to chop; and we're faced with this reality of considering it in detail before we go on and vote accordingly. The challenge for every member in this House is what it is we seek to do and what is the way forward. The key thing is we need to make sure that we have a path to get the voice of small business into this parliament as part of this conversation. It's a simple proposition: if the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations can't figure out drafting, and then, in addition to that, how to implement Labor's industrial relations agenda and can't even pay its own workers right, then how is the person running the milk bar, the home business, the corner store, the local florist—without an HR department, without a bureaucracy and with thousands of pages mounting every single day—supposed to figure out how Labor's laws are going to work. We shouldn't forget that this is how these laws are designed, because, of course, Labor has a very clever, actually, but sneaky answer to this. The sneaky answer to this is, 'Well, that's it; we'll just get the unions to come in and do it for you.' You lose agency over your business, you lose agency over your employees, and you become appropriated by the vast network of the Labor Party and its various arms or, more correctly put, the ACTU's arms and, of course, its political arm, which is the Australian Labor Party. But this does nothing for growth. It does nothing for activity. It does nothing to improve Australian industry. It does nothing for future generations of Australians. It does nothing for workers, particularly because right now we have this massive problem where people need arrangements of work. One of the key ways you get productivity enhancement is when people do things because they're happy and because it actually works for them. Instead, we have a government that is seeking to kneecap at every single point small businesses and workers to come to arrangements on their own mutual benefits and their own mutual terms—undermining pay increases, undermining employers, undermining the independent work regulator they set up to determine these things, all in pursuit of a scare campaign of a problem that didn't exist. In addition to that, in a parliament where, as far as I've counted as late, everyone supports penalty rates, and against a backdrop of a minister who isn't on top of her brief, who has done a sloppy version of drafting her legislation and who is increasingly not confident enough to stand up and make the case for us. Now the parliament faces a choice. My only hope is that, in that other ethereal place called the Senate chamber, Labor might back down from its attempt to silence and shut out other voices. They might actually provide the pathway for input, not just from the opposition but, hey, even from some of the other minor parties, and, of course, from the small businesses of this nation so that they can have a say in their future, their destiny and their opportunity to employ Australians. Then they can call out the limitations of Labor's agenda. A partnership between small business and workers is how you're going to boost productivity growth, not laws and intimidation, and certainly not by adding more costs, more regulations that have one purpose: to take money out of the pockets of workers and fund industrial relations lawyers, accountants and back-end HR departments for local corner stores, home businesses and, of course, web based businesses and the full spectrum of startup side hustles and shared-equity schemes across this country. Why would Labor want to do this? Because in the absence of an agenda that actually focuses on rising standards of living and finding a pathway to achieve raising standards of living, their only pathway forward is to go to the bottom of the barrel, find a new low in the trough, and think, 'If you mine and harvest that, somehow you're going to get a better outcome.' That's a short-term political hit. It's absolutely a short-term sugar hit. It doesn't solve any of the fundamental structural problems. And now we face a situation where the government, increasingly concerned about the sloppy nature of its drafting of its own legislation, is concerned about the process that its own minister has gone through. Time, patience and cooperation would have fixed it, but when they were asked for that in this chamber, they shut people's voices down. They shut down the pathway for people outside this chamber who had constructive things to say to improve the laws of this country from having input. Our hope is that this is fixed in this next chapter. But, frankly, it is over to the government, because they have not been willing participants in this conversation. There's not just declining confidence in the minister but, in addition to that, declining confidence that the government is actually interested in listening to industry about how it can improve workers' conditions, flexibility and wages. It's such an important thing to do. I understand it requires some people to step back and to accept that maybe not everything is being done on their terms. But I can tell you that, if you do, the workers and the small businesses of this nation will thank you. 13:15 Ms COKER 263547 Corangamite Let me start with a simple principle. If you are working weekends, public holidays, early mornings or late nights, you deserve to be paid fairly. That time matters to workers, to families and to our communities. That's what penalty rates are all about—making sure working Australians are properly paid for giving up their precious time that could be spent with family or friends. This legislation, the Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Penalty and Overtime Rates) Bill 2025, delivers on a clear promise we made to Australians to protect the penalty rates and overtime pay of those covered by modern awards. It delivers on this straightaway, not after delays, as proposed by those opposite. I would like to take a moment to reject the comments of the previous speaker, the member for Goldstein. He asked, 'How many small businesses will be impacted by this legislation?' None. This legislation doesn't change current penalty rates; it enshrines and protects them. But what it does do is stop the bartering away of workers' rights and their penalty rates. Workers deserve certainty now, and that's what this bill delivers. The bill makes a straightforward but powerful change to the Fair Work Act. It says the independent umpire, the Fair Work Commission, must not make changes to awards that reduce penalty rates or overtime entitlements or roll them out into other arrangements that leave workers worse off. This bill is all about fairness. It's about decency. It's about standing up for the people who often have the least power in the workplace but who give so much of their time and energy to keeping our country running. We know that workers who rely on modern awards are more likely to be younger, more likely to be women and more likely to be casual, part time or in insecure work. Many of them work in sectors like retail, hospitality, aged care and health care, and many of them live in communities like mine in Corangamite. They rely on the fairness that is at the heart of penalty rates. Right now, that fairness is under threat. There's a loophole in the system, one that allows employers to propose terms that roll out penalty and overtime rates into a single rate of pay, even when that means workers are left worse off. Some employers are using that loophole. They are applying to the commission to reduce what low-paid workers are entitled to by replacing penalty rates with flat pay structures. Let me be clear. These are not high-flying executives we are talking about. These are workers on modest incomes, the very people the award system is meant to protect. It is happening right now. The Fair Work Commission is currently dealing with cases where employers are trying to lock in these kinds of arrangements. The opposition have made it clear they won't stand in the way of these employers. Their leader says without hesitation, 'We don't propose to depart from the current arrangements.' Well, we do, because we believe the award system should act as a safety net, not a ceiling. We believe a full weekend of retail work shouldn't leave you short on rent and we believe that, if you're asked to give up your nights, your holidays or your family time, your pay shouldn't quietly go backwards. The bottom line is that a worker should not be asked to barter away their rights and conditions of work that we, the great labour movement and unions, have fought so hard for. That's why this legislation matters and that's what we're doing; we're acting. This bill builds on the strong workplace reforms we've already delivered. Since forming government, we've made it our mission to get wages moving again and to restore fairness to our workplace laws. We've backed every increase to the minimum wage, including a 3.5 per cent increase from 1 July. We've closed loopholes that kept wages low, with same job, same pay laws now delivering up to $60,000 extra to some workers. We've made gender equality a key principle of workplace law, helping drive the gender pay gap to its lowest level ever. We've introduced the right to disconnect, making it clear that workers have a right to switch off at the end of the day, and we're reinvigorating enterprise bargaining. Since our reforms, more than 9,800 entrepreneur agreements have been approved, covering more than nearly 2.5 million workers. As of March this year, almost 2.7 million Australians are covered by an active enterprise agreement—the highest number on record since enterprise bargaining began in 1991. The average wage increase under those agreements is 3.8 per cent, well above the five-year average before our reforms and higher than inflation. These are real outcomes for real people. This bill strengthens that progress and locks in protections for workers on modern awards. Let me explain exactly how the bill works. It amends the Fair Work Act to introduce a new section, 135A. It requires the Fair Work Commission to make sure that penalty and overtime rates in awards aren't reduced and that awards don't include terms that substitute those entitlements in a way that cuts take-home pay. This means the commission will still have flexibility to do its work but it will have a clear principle it must follow: protect the pay of workers who rely on penalty and overtime rates. This change is carefully designed. It targets the kinds of changes that would reduce the percentage of pay a worker receives for penalty hours or roll those penalties up into a flat rate that's worth less overall. It doesn't impact individual contracts, it doesn't apply to enterprise agreements and it doesn't stop good faith efforts to modernise awards. It stops pay quietly being cut for the people who can least afford it. This bill doesn't impose anything new. Employers already have a legal obligation to pay their workers according to the award. If the award says a casual worker gets an extra 25 per cent for working Saturday nights, that's what they should be paid. This bill doesn't change that obligation; it reinforces it. It gives certainty to employers who are doing the right thing, and it stops the race to the bottom for a handful who aren't. We've consulted widely to make sure these changes are fair, balanced and workable. I thank the minister for the work that has been done on this bill. Importantly, this bill respects the independence of the Fair Work Commission. The commission will continue to apply the law in a careful, consultative way, taking into account the views of workers, unions, employers and other stakeholders. This is not about heavy-handed interference; it's about giving the commission a clear mandate to protect core entitlements and give workers confidence that their penalty rates are not up for grabs. Just as importantly, this bill supports the continued success of enterprise bargaining. We want to see more enterprise agreements—agreements that deliver better pay, better conditions and more productive workplaces. That's why we've reformed the system, making bargaining more accessible and more meaningful for workers and employers alike. This bill does not interfere with that. It preserves the better off overall test, which ensures that workers are in fact better off under enterprise agreements, and it continues to support the idea that genuine negotiations, with safeguards in place, can lead to win-win outcomes for business and workers alike. What this bill does is protect the floor so no-one falls below it. For many workers in Corangamite, this is personal. I've had people come up to me in the street stalls in Belmont and Leopold and tell me: 'I work weekends because I have to, not because I want to. Penalty rates are the reason I can keep up with my rent. Without them, I'd be in real trouble.' These are workers we rely on in aged care, in child care, in food service, in our regional health centres and in our small business. They're not asking for more than they deserve. They're asking for the bare minimum to not go backwards, and that is exactly what this bill guarantees. As I said at the beginning of my speech, this is a matter of principle. If we value people's time, we should show it. If we ask people to work when others rest, we need to reward that. If we believe in fairness, in dignity and in decency, we can't stand by while the wages of our lowest-paid workers are quietly eroded. This bill draws a line. It says: 'Enough. No more hiding pay cuts in the fine print. No more trading away penalty rates without scrutiny. No more quiet reductions to the pay of people who already earn the least.' This bill protects what's fair. It protects what's right. It protects the thousands of Australians who keep our economy running, our shops open, our hospitals staffed and our communities cared for. I want to thank unions and workers who have fought tirelessly for these protections. You have made your voices heard, you have stood up for your mates and we have listened. In closing, let me say that this is a government that stands with working people. It is a government that believes penalty rates are a right, not a privilege, and it's a government that will keep fighting for fairness, respect and better pay for all Australians. I commend the bill to the House. 13:26 Ms LAWRENCE 299150 Hasluck The Labor Party is Australia's oldest political party. Born from the labour movement, defending workers' rights is in our blood. Now, over 100 years later, we are still here fighting for the rights of workers across this great nation. The Albanese Labor government, like our forebears, is committed to delivering fair pay and decent conditions for Australians. With this bill, the Albanese Labor government is delivering on a key election commitment to protect the penalty rates of around 2.6 million modern-award-reliant workers, many of whom count on penalty rates to make ends meet. Most people do work a nine to five day. Their work and their kids' schooling takes place during the week, and on the weekend there is time for rest and togetherness. It is the rhythm, and rhythm is healthy. The other way we celebrate the weekend is by going out. We might go for a hike or ride bikes, but then we often do stop somewhere for lunch, don't we? We stop at the coffee shops or we go have a nice drink at a bar. I certainly do. I know my friends do. Those lunches, the coffees, the wine bars—they don't make themselves. When we ask other people to adjust their weekly rhythm to suit ours, we need to recognise that and we need to pay for that. The only way to fail to support penalty rates, to fail to support this legislation, is to fail to recognise that someone is putting themselves out there for us, to simply take the attitude that 'I'm alright, Jack.' Labor members do not take that attitude, not in this or in any other area of policy. Be it Medicare, universal superannuation—we were never founded on the attitude of 'I'm alright, Jack.' We cannot undervalue the workers who give up their time outside of what we consider regular working hours to provide us with the services that we seek during our downtime. So this bill comes at an important time, as we have seen a sustained effort from certain employers to roll penalty rates and overtime rates into a single rate of pay, leaving some employees worse off. The Fair Work Commission is considering a proposal from employers in the retail, clerical and banking sectors to cut the penalty rates of lower-paid workers who rely on modern awards. Can you imagine companies, businesses that are making millions or billions of dollars of profit, turning to squeeze just that little bit more out by targeting the lowest-paid workers in Australia? We can't stand by while crucial workers nationwide are left worse off. We must always act to ensure that applications like these in no way see workers' pay packets reduced. We must always act to ensure Australia's lowest paid workers are protected from wage cuts. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour. The member will have leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed. STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS 46 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Protest: Victoria to New South Wales Interconnector West, Institute of Public Affairs 46 13:30 Dr WEBSTER 281688 Mallee Right now, brave and passionate Mallee residents are protesting in Spring Street on the steps of Parliament House in Melbourne about the Allan Labor government's draconian new powers to force through the VNI West transmission line. Farmers face fines of up to $12,000 if they refuse access to Transmission Company Victoria, an arm of the Victorian government, to build the VNI West transmission line. To be clear: TCV have the right to use boltcutters to cut chains and locks at the farmer's farm gate. I commend Mallee constituents who are speaking out, including Andrew Weidemann, Jason Barratt, Ben Duxson, Marcia McIntyre, Barry Batters, James and Emma Burke, Gerald Feeny, Glenden Watts, Tess Healy, Billy Baldwin, Cindy O'Sullivan, Will and Rachel McIntyre and so many more. I am so proud that Mallee is speaking out against Labor's divisive 'rewiring the nation' reckless energy rollout. I also commend the Institute of Public Affairs for their documentary The Faces of Net Zero, featuring many I have named. I thank Peta Credlin, Chris Kenny, Peter Hunt and others in the media who are giving Mallee farmers a voice. Thank you, each one. RAAF Base Amberley 46 13:31 Mr NEUMANN HVO Blair The people of Blair are rightly proud of Ipswich's unique position as home to Australia's largest operational Air Force base, known as RAAF Base Amberley—home to both Air Force and Army units. The base has been operating since the early 1940s. It plays a vital role in our nation's defence and security and in providing humanitarian assistance and disaster responses globally, especially for our Pacific neighbours, given its proximity to the region, and in Australia. I've seen that across Ipswich on numerous occasions through our many floods. We have a proud record of defence service in Blair, and Ipswich's military history goes back 165 years to colonial times, with residents from across our area fighting in every major conflict involving Australia. I'm very proud to have RAAF Base Amberley in my electorate. It's a terrific asset for our region and makes a huge contribution to our local economy and community, with over 5,000 ADF personnel working on base and 14,000 ADF veterans and their families living across the Ipswich region. In recent weeks, RAAF Base Amberley has become a significant logistics hub and centrepiece of international defence activity for exercise Talisman Sabre 2025, hosting aircraft and personnel from around the world, including the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Japan and Germany—more than 35,000 troops and 150 aircraft participating, making the largest exercise in Australia's history. Thanks to the RAAF Base Amberley. A thank you for the personnel who work there as well. Liebrecht, Mrs Violet 46 13:33 Mr WILLCOX 286535 Dawson I rise today to honour a remarkable milestone achieved by a remarkable lady and constituent of mine, Violet Liebrecht, who recently celebrated her 100th birthday. I had the privilege of meeting Violent and presented her with a certificate in honour of reaching a century of life filled with service, resilience and community spirit. Violet shared some incredible stories from her time serving in the Women's Auxiliary Australian Air Force, the WAAAF, which played a vital role in supporting the Royal Australian Air Force. Violet's service is an important reminder of the contribution that women make to our national defence. Continuing her contribution to our country, Violet's other career was a dairy farmer, undertaking hard work and long hours to feed our nation. Daughters Rhonda and Sandra, along with Christy and the wonderful team at Regis Aged Care in Ayr, decorated the dining hall for the heartfelt celebration that was attended by many family and friends. Of course, I couldn't resist asking Violet for her secret to long life. Her answer, with a cheeky smile, was 'milk and biscuits'—wise words. It was a joy to be part of these celebrations and to personally congratulate Violet on this incredible milestone. I thank her for her service and contribution to our community. Happy birthday, Violet. Tertiary Education 46 13:35 Ms KARA COOK 316537 Bonner The Albanese Labor government promised that cutting student debt would be the first thing we would do, and that's exactly what we've done. The Universities Accord (Cutting Student Debt by 20 Per Cent) Bill delivers on our commitment to reduce student debt by 20 per cent. This measure will take pressure off around 21,000 residents in my electorate of Bonner. The average student debt today is about $27,600. This legislation will cut that debt by about $5½ thousand. This will deliver significant cost-of-living relief to those with student debt in Bonner. It also builds on the significant reforms the Albanese government is already implementing in education, including free TAFE. I am so proud to have the Mount Gravatt TAFE in my electorate and am equally as proud of this government's commitment to providing relief for students and young people while continuing to protect the integrity and value of the HELP system, which has expanded higher education access for millions of Australians, including myself. I am so proud that this is the first legislation for this parliament, and I won't forget the thousands of students I spoke to in Bonner during the campaign who told me that this policy was a key reason they were voting Labor. We will continue to deliver for them. Paulger, Mr Shane 47 13:36 Mr KATTER HX4 Kennedy I once walked with giants. Few could even come close to Shane Paulger, a quiet, considered man of great intellect but also a tenacious fighter. Shane single-handedly organised one of Australia's greatest fights—the fight against dairy deregulation and for a fair price for dairy farmers, some of the hardest-working people in our country. Like many great leaders and fighters, Shane and his family took a significant emotional and financial hit for leading this fight. What would deter others fuelled Shane Paulger. As national president and founder of the KAP, he led the KAP to 21 per cent of the Queensland vote outside the south-east corner. KAP now has four MPs and a strong base representing rural and regional Australia, agriculture, mining and developmentalism. Australia is a greater nation because of his advocacy. To him we all owe a great debt of gratitude. Vale, Shane. May you rest in peace. Thank you for being a good Australian and a good bloke. Project Youth 47 13:37 Mr MONCRIEFF 316540 Hughes All young people in our community have a lot of pressures with which they need to deal, but these pressures are compounded when there are other disadvantages that young people face. That's why I'm so proud of the work that Project Youth do in my community. They offer programs that provide support for young people aged 12 to 24 across southern Sydney facing a range of disadvantages, including homelessness, mental ill health, drug and alcohol dependency and unemployment. These are programs that enable young people to be connected, safe, achieving and healthy. They're qualities that all young people should be able to reach. Project Youth have been doing incredible work in my community for decades. They began with just three staff members in 1993, and now they run 22 programs across three teams. Project Youth have had an office in Menai, in the heart of Hughes, since 2002, and in 2014 they started Cafe Y, later called Cafe Social, which served as a hospitality training hub for vulnerable youth. The community was so sad to see this service come to an end a few weeks ago, but I want to pay tribute to the impact that it had over its 11 years. Three hundred and forty-eight people were directly supported through trauma informed wraparound employment services that produced job-ready candidates. The work of Project Youth does continue, even though Cafe Social has finished, and it's across those three teams that it continues to play a vital role in giving young people the support that they need to fulfil their potential. I want to thank Project Youth for the incredible work that they continue to do. National Disability Insurance Scheme 47 13:39 Dr HAINES 282335 Indi Last month I met with more than a dozen of Indi's physiotherapists, occupational therapists, dietitians, speech pathologists and support coordinators about their serious concerns and worries about the recent NDIS pricing review changes, particularly the changes to travel. Under the new rules, the amount that therapy providers can claim for travel is halved. The NDIA says the changes respond to participants whose travel costs are draining their plans. This might be true in the cities, but this cookie-cutter approach completely fails to recognise how NDIS service providers operate in regional areas, and the impacts are dire for communities like mine. In Indi, providers aren't just travelling 15 minutes to see a client; they are often making a two-hour round trip from our bigger towns like Wangaratta or Wodonga to smaller communities like Corryong and the Upper Murray or Myrtleford in the Alpine Shire. Slashing travel prices will likely mean it is no longer financially viable for NDIS providers to reach these communities and provide home based supports that are crucial for participant choice and comfort. I heard from one of just two paediatric dietitians in the region who may no longer be able to provide home based care. Children on PEG feeds could miss out on feeds or assessments, and that is unacceptable—absolutely unacceptable. I urge the government to pause these pricing changes immediately, to consult with providers and to protect these NDIS services in the regions. Netball 47 13:40 Ms BRISKEY 263427 Maribyrnong A 10-goal deficit, a vocal away crowd and history stand between the Melbourne Vixens and their place in this weekend's Super Netball grand final. Last Sunday, we witnessed a stunning fourth-quarter comeback as the Vixens put on a clinical performance to defeat the New South Wales Swifts by a single goal in the preliminary final. Not since 2018 has a team finished fourth on the ladder and progressed to the Super Netball grand final. Despite the odds, the Vixens came out on top. It should not have come as a surprise. The Vixens have won three of the past five preliminary finals, each by a goal, and will now face off in their fourth grand final. Despite the rise of other sporting codes, netball remains the most popular female sport in Victoria, and the Vixens are one of the many jewels in our state's sporting crown. Since their establishment in 2007, the Vixens have competed in two competitions, making the finals in 12 out of 17 seasons, and have featured 22 Australian Diamonds, with five currently on their list. They are the standard-bearers for sporting excellence and are an inspiration to young girls and women in my electorate of Maribyrnong and the wider Victorian community. This weekend, I, like so many Victorians, will be proudly cheering on the Vixens to lift the cup for the first time since 2020. Go, Vixens! Women in Sport 48 13:42 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein Goldstein residents were dismayed that, despite promises otherwise over the previous three years, the community was sidelined. The reality was lived in October 2022 under the federal budget. The Albanese government slashed $100 million of infrastructure funding from Bayside and Glen Eira. Once slashed, Goldstein was promised we'd recoup the funding, but we got nada, zero, zip. At the 2022 and 2025 elections, we announced funding for Wilson Storage Trevor Barker Oval in Sandringham to upgrade the women's change rooms. Shamed by inaction and for, of course, ripping funding out of the community, Labor then moved to match the funding. Well, Labor won the election, so I've written to the Minister for Sport and the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government and the Treasurer seeking the urgent delivery of this $1.8 million. Young women playing footy deserve a fair go—to have decent facilities equal to men. Ministers, Treasurer, it's time to deliver. Women's footy deserves a fair go and dignity. It's not fair that women miss out. I seek leave to table a copy of the letter to the ministers and the Treasurer. Leave granted. Mr TIM WILSON IMW I table the letter. Netball 48 13:43 Ms RYAN 249224 Lalor On Saturday night is the Suncorp Super Netball grand final. It will be played between the Melbourne Vixens and West Coast Fever. It is going to be a cracker. Clearly, I'm supporting the Melbourne Vixens. Special commiserations go to the member for Bennelong, who was in Sydney last week at the game where the Swifts lost by a goal to the Vixens, to see the Vixens go through to the grand final. Commiserations, too, to my friends who support the Thunderbirds, who the Vixens beat the week before on their journey to this great, classic grand final. This grand final is critically important. Simone McKinnis, Victorian legend, Australian Diamond, coach of the Melbourne Vixens, will be coaching them for the last time. This is the dream finish. I'll be there with colleagues and tens of thousands of Victorians to support Simone and Kate Moloney, our captain, in their game against the West Coast Fever. It's going to take every inch of grit and determination the Vixens can put on court to take the firm favourites, the Fever, but I'll put my money on the Vixens. Go Vixens! Flynn Electorate: Stronger Communities Program 48 13:45 Mr BOYCE 299498 Flynn I'm pleased to report that 11 community groups in the Flynn electorate will share $130,000 of funding from the federal government's Stronger Communities Program to undertake a range of programs to build community engagement and participation. These successful applicants include GAPDL Communities for Children in Gladstone, for a facility upgrade; the Mount Larcom and District Social Society, for a disabled toilet and shower building; Queensland Police-Citizens Youth Welfare Association, for the replacement of AEDs at the PYCs in Gladstone, Blackwater and Emerald; South Burnett Regional Council, for the Wondai Street tree-replacement program; Taroom Kindergarten Association Inc., for outdoor blinds; Calliope Football Club, for a defibrillator; Moore Park Beach Arts Inc., for an annexe fit-out; Youthspace Gayndah, for the student laptop initiative; Emerald and Districts Athletics Association, for the Athletics to Go Go Get Ready Project; the Gladstone RSL Sub-Branch, for the installation of solar; and Borilla Community Kindergarten Association Inc. at Emerald, for a sustainable shade outdoor kitchen. Local community groups are the heart and soul of our region. Their dedication and tireless efforts improve our social fabric, enhance our local amenities and foster community spirit, and I thank them all for their efforts. I congratulate all the successful applicants for their vision and community commitment, making the Flynn electorate a better place to be. Grover, Ms Deborah 48 13:46 Mr REPACHOLI 298840 Hunter Today I rise to honour an outstanding individual of the Hunter, Deborah Grover, who this month celebrates an incredible 40 years of service to NSW Health. Deborah began her nursing career at Callan Park hospital in Sydney back in August 1985. In the mid-1990s she moved to the Central Coast, where she has been making a difference ever since. In 2000, while raising three young kids, she was elected staff representative to the board of Central Coast health, and that's no small feat. Most of us struggle to find our car keys when juggling family life, but Deborah ran a household, cared for patients and helped shape the future of local health care all at once. For the past 13 years she has worked as a clinical nurse consultant in mental health within the Central Coast Local Health District, helping some of the most vulnerable people in our community. Over the decades, she has worked at Morisset psychiatric hospital, Lake Haven Community Health Centre, Wyong Hospital and Gosford Hospital. Every place she has worked, she has left behind a legacy of care, strength and empathy. Deborah's commitment is truly unmatched. I've been told that, if dedication were an Olympic sport, Deborah would have taken home gold, silver and bronze and still come back for a double shift the next day. Deborah, on behalf of all of us, thank you for your extraordinary service and congratulations on a remarkable 40-year career. I say to all of the Olympians in the gallery today: once an Olympian, always an Olympian. Thank you for what you do for the country. Cheers! Casey Hospital 49 13:48 Mr WOOD E0F La Trobe At a time of emergency, when you go to the hospital you want to make sure you're seen quickly, especially if it's your child. Back in 2019 my own daughter, Jasmine, had an anaphylactic reaction, and they took her to Casey Hospital. I was amazed by how many people were waiting in the emergency department. The great news back in 2019 was that funding was announced under the former health minister Greg Hunt for an emergency department specifically for children. The state Labor government agreed to this, and yet we've had delays since 2020. It was delayed in 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 and, guess what, again in 2025. When it comes to a children's emergency department at Casey Hospital, the whole project is still delayed. Parents are contacting me all the time saying, 'When is work going to start?' When I visit the hospital, the nurses and the doctors are under so much pressure and stress. They want this emergency department for children to be up and running. It is an absolute crying shame and disgraceful that the Labor government of Victoria hasn't got Casey Hospital emergency department for children up and running. It is in one of the fastest-growing areas in Australia. It needs this emergency department for children, it needed it six years ago, it needs work— (Time expired) Critical Minerals Industry 49 13:49 Mr GOSLING 245392 Solomon I'm proud to speak about Arafura's Nolans project in the Northern Territory. It's a nation-building initiative for Australia's rare earths future. It is the largest resource project ever in the Northern Territory, with the longest life. It is the world's most advanced, construction-ready, ore-to-oxide rare earths project. The Nolans project has the power to transform and open up Australia's rare earth sector, establishing the Northern Territory as a central processing and logistics hub through vital collaboration between government, industry and local communities. Nolan's strategic location near the Stuart Highway and the rail line offers a unique opportunity to develop and secure supply chains across the Northern Territory and central Australian regions. The Nolans project directly supports key government agendas, including the Critical Minerals Strategy 2023-2030, the Critical Minerals Strategic Reserve, the Building Better Regions Fund, the Future Made in Australia, the G7 Critical Minerals Action Plan and the Northern Australia Action Plan 2024-2029. The Australian government is proud to have invested in the Nolans project with support from Export Finance Australia, EFA; the Northern Australian Infrastructure Facility, the NAIF; and the National Reconstruction Fund, the NRF. It's an important project for our nation, particularly when rare earths and critical minerals have become so important to our economy. Workplace Relations 49 13:51 Mr YOUNG 201906 Longman Yesterday, I made a speech that simply stated facts based on data. I said that men and women, in the main, naturally draw more to different vocations. Quotas trying to equalise workplace numbers by gender, sexuality, religion or race are demeaning and insulting to women and other cohorts. Everything should be based on merit and equal opportunity for all, and I stand by that. What amazed me was the response from the member for Ballarat who, in question time, quoted part of my speech and tried to twist my words to mean something they didn't. When you speak the truth, you have to expect this sort of response from the Labor Party. What was even more amazing was that in her rant the member actually inferred that people in the vocations that women, in the main, are more drawn to, like hairdressing, nursing and social work—again, this is simply a fact backed by employment data—are less valuable or important than doctors, engineers and CEOs. I can say to the hairdressers, nurses and social workers out there: whether you be male or female, even if Labor consider you to be a second-class citizen, we on this side of the House appreciate you and consider you just as valuable to our society as a doctor, engineer or CEO, and we thank you for the vital role that you play in our society. Woolwich Marina 50 13:52 Mr LAXALE 299174 Bennelong Woolwich is a special part of Sydney and a very special part of Bennelong. It's where the Parramatta and Lane Cove rivers meet and home to Cockatoo Island. It's a place of environmental heritage and recreational significance, and home to Kellys Bush—the site of Australia's first successful green ban. Last year, a proposal was lodged to turn the small existing local marina into a large-scale commercial facility with berths for nearly 80 vessels, including very, very large superyachts. The development was unanimously rejected by Sydney North Planning Panel, echoing strong opposition from local residents, environmental experts, heritage groups and the local sailing club. However, new documents were lodged last week by the applicant, meaning the proposal is once again on public exhibition, until 22 August. It's important for residents to have their say. I'd encourage anyone with an interest to take the time to look at these documents and to make a submission, because, if this proposal is approved, it'll have lasting impacts on our harbour, our environment and our shared public spaces. I'd like to acknowledge the many locals who've stayed engaged and contacted me in my office throughout this process, particularly the Save Our Shores group and the Hunters Hill Trust, whose advocacy has been clear, constructive and community minded from the start. They've worked to raise awareness of this proposal and worked with many like-minded local councillors like Marc Lane and Ross Williams. I'd encourage those who are interested to have their say. South Australia: Marine Environment 50 13:54 Ms BELL 282981 Moncrieff Last Friday, we heard an extraordinary admission from those opposite in relation to South Australia's algal bloom crisis. The member for Adelaide and its beaches said that he accepted criticism that this has been a bit slow, and that the best time to have done this would have been some weeks ago, maybe even a few months ago. So why didn't they act sooner? Why did those opposite ignore the advice from scientists for 18 months? Why didn't they act when marine creatures started washing up dead on beaches four months ago? The scientists warned those opposite. Now, 14,000 marine creatures have died, and seafood and tourism industries have been decimated. The Minister for the Environment and Water was on the record claiming that it was a state issue, only to then backflip on his comment. Talk about a wet fish situation! He dashed down to Adelaide to get the obligatory social media content on the beach with those dead sea creatures and announced a minuscule funding package three days later. This government is on the go slow when it comes to the environment and environmental policies. They know it and they've admitted it. Australians should be deeply disappointed about how this government ignored scientists and local businesses. To those opposite: shame on you. Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki 50 13:55 Ms LAWRENCE 299150 Hasluck This week I introduced a motion in solemn remembrance of one of the darkest chapters in human history, the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which occurred 88 years ago this August. Over 2,000 lives were lost, and the course of history was changed forever. Those who survived, the hibakusha, carried not only the physical scars but the burden of memory and intergenerational trauma. Mr Isao Morimoto, present here today, is a second-generation hibakusha who has shared with me his then 13-year-old mother's, Junko's, reflection of the day—of the screaming voices, of the opening of that door to hell, of finding the bones of her friends. Morimoto-san, we spoke about how indiscriminate it is, how no emergency service can cope with the scale of destruction of nuclear detonation. You asked that we not rest in the narrative for why they were used but focus on the pledge to victims, 'We shall not repeat the mistake.' We honour the survivor group Nihon Hidankyo who were awarded the 2024 Nobel Peace Prize and to ICAN for their steadfast advocacy here and abroad, particularly with First Nations communities and military personnel affected by British nuclear testing. Many lived through the devastation without consent, without information and—far too often—without justice. But change is possible through treaties, diplomacy and peace. Morimoto-san, your mother asked to you pass the baton so that door will never open again. Today you did. Albanese Government 50 13:57 Mr BUCHHOLZ 230531 Wright Time and time again we see the Prime Minister come into this chamber and say that those on this side of the House continually, in the last parliament, said 'no, no, no' to legislation. So I thought I'd fact check that little bit of information. I went to no less than the Parliamentary Library, and they reliably informed me that there were 375 pieces of legislation that were debated in this place in the last parliament. I don't remember saying no to all of them. If you listen to the Prime Minister, he would have you believe that we said no to all of them. So I asked them, 'How many pieces of legislation that came before the chamber did we actually support?' How many do you reckon we supported? If you listen to him, you'd think we didn't support any of them. We actually supported 85 per cent of legislation that came here. You can't believe what this fellow says. Our job on this side of the House is to hold government to account. We will hold you to account when you set emission targets and you miss them by this much. We'll hold you to account when you set prices for electricity and you say they're going to reduce by $275, and they actually go up by 32 per cent. We'll hold you to account when you say there'll be no new taxes but sneakily let out information from the treasury department that we'll have to increase taxes in order to meet the future revenue streams. On this side of the House we need a strong, formidable opposition, now more than ever. Under this leader and under this team, we will deliver. We will keep you accountable, and we will be the formidable— (Time expired) Wages and Salaries 51 13:59 Mr FRENCH 316550 Moore Those of you who enjoyed my first speech already know I come from working-class stock. Before I wore this pin, I wore steel caps. I even bought beers while studying. I did this for a rate of $8 an hour thanks to the Liberal government's work choices. Getting by on this rate meant struggling to pay for rent and groceries. I am proud to stand here as a member of the great Australian Labor Party because we're on the side of workers. We get it; we've lived the reality of trying to make a living and we're determined to lift standards—not engage in a race to the bottom like those opposite. That's why, last week, the Albanese Labor government introduced the Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Penalty and Overtime Rates) Bill 2025 to make sure penalty and overtime rates can't be traded away and that no worker is left worse off. It safeguards the take-home pay of around 2.6 million award-reliant Australian workers, including in my electorate of Moore. This bill protects the people who keep our shops open and our hospitals running 24/7—the shift workers who keep the lights on when many people are at home with their family. Protecting penalty rates is about respecting people's time and effort. I've stood on job sites and picket lines, and I know what a few extra dollars on a Sunday means for the family budget. People shouldn't need multiple jobs to cover the basics. (Time expired) The SPEAKER 53517 Order! In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded. DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 51 DISTINGUISHED VISITORS Moscow Olympic Games: Australian Team 51 14:00 The SPEAKER 53517 I'd like to inform the House that present in the gallery today is a group of Australian Olympians and their families, commemorating the 45th anniversary of the 1980 Moscow Olympics Australian team. On behalf of the House, I extend a very warm welcome to you all. Honourable members: Hear, hear! STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE 51 STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE Moscow Olympic Games: Australian Team 51 14:01 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler On behalf of the government, and on behalf of the people of Australia, it is a privilege to welcome the members of the 1980 Australian Olympic team joining us here today in Parliament House. Today, as a parliament, we honour your contribution to our nation's Olympic history. We recognise your participation, but, importantly as well, we recognise your pain. We extend that recognition to all those who cannot be with us today. To qualify for an Olympic Games demands exceptional talent and so much more. It requires character, courage, commitment, years of hard work, single-minded dedication and sacrifice. Athletes and their loved ones pour countless hours into the pursuit of the Olympic dream. The culmination of that effort—being selected to represent the greatest nation on Earth, Australia, on the biggest sporting stage in the world—should be a moment of fierce and absolute pride. When you are chosen to wear the green and gold, you should draw strength from knowing that the whole nation is with you. And, on your return, you should be welcomed home and celebrated for the inspiration you have brought to the next generation of Australian athletes. Yet, 45 years ago, the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan cast a dark shadow over what should have been your shining moment. As nations around the world grappled with the boycott, Australia's athletes—some still only teenagers—were placed in an incredibly difficult position. One hundred and twenty-one Australians chose to compete under the Olympic flag, and others chose to join the boycott. And some who had won selection never even had the chance to choose, because their sport made that decision for them. Those who went and those who withdrew were both subject to all manner of vile abuse, even death threats. Lisa Forrest was just 16 when she was made captain of the women's swim team. She wrote of how her family kept a whistle next to the home phone to blast the constant prank callers. Chris Wardlaw, who competed in the marathon at both Montreal and Moscow, recalls that back in 1976 a marching band had played 'Waltzing Matilda' to farewell the athletes. In 1980, the last question he was asked by a journalist at the airport was: 'Do you feel that you are being traitors to Australia?' Looking back, it is little wonder that many still bear scars and trauma from those days. That only makes the efforts and success of the Australian team at those games all the more extraordinary. Australia won nine medals, including gold for Michelle Ford in the women's 800-metre freestyle and gold in the men's 4x100-metre medley. These were Australia's first gold medals since the Munich Olympics of 1972, yet the returning athletes were met only by cold silence or cruel comments. Today, we fix that. Today, on the 45th anniversary, we recognise all that you have achieved and acknowledge all that you have overcome. Take pride in both. You are Olympians, you are Australians, and you have earned your place in the history of the game and our nation. Welcome to parliament, and welcome home. 14:05 Ms LEY 00AMN Farrer I rise to acknowledge the Australian athletes in the gallery today and all those who competed in Moscow. A hundred and twenty-one Australian athletes across 17 sports made the decision to compete, returning with a haul of two gold, two silver and five bronze medals. They made their country proud. I also acknowledge the many Australian athletes who did not go. These are Australians who sacrificed much to become Olympic athletes. These are Australians who bore a personal cost for a principled decision—a decision to stand up against tyranny and stand up for democracy. These Australians were caught in the balance of a contest between two futures and two worlds—a contest that we, as Australians, in our free and democratic country, had a clear stake in. In 1980, the world was in the grip of the Cold War. The Berlin Wall still stood, and communities behind the Iron Curtain were being crushed under the jackboots of communist totalitarianism. The Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, destroying towns, villages and road networks, while landmines devastated the population. For many Afghan Australians who immigrated here and are now part of our Australian family, the Soviet invasion of their homeland was marked by its brutality. Eventual estimates are that anywhere between one million and three million Afghans died. To them, this boycott mattered. For many Eastern European migrants who fled this evil regime for similar reasons, this boycott mattered. So many people from so many countries fled to places like Australia in search of a better life. The decision made by former prime minister Malcolm Fraser to support the US-led boycott was the right one, and history has judged it so. We would not send athletes to an Olympics in Moscow today, and the Australian government was right to support a boycott then. That decision—correct as it was—takes nothing away from the Australians who did compete. They should not be personally attacked. They should never have been personally attacked. I repeat to you in the gallery today: you made Australia proud. For every athlete who went to the Moscow Games, there were other athletes who did not. One of our greatest sprinters, Raelene Boyle, a three-time Olympic silver medallist, chose not to compete, stating, 'It was one of the hardest decisions of my life.' I remember being so inspired by Raelene Boyle. She is a hero. I also remember and acknowledge Tracey Wickham. She had broken multiple world records and was a red-hot favourite to win gold in Moscow. Like so many others, she did not go. Four decades later, the Cold War has ended, but the memory of that time reminds us of the importance of standing up on the world stage for our values, even when the cost is heavy. It is an enormous source of national pride that we will host the Brisbane Olympics in 2032. I know that team Australia will take inspiration from all those who competed as well as those who did not, because all Australian athletes in 1980 demonstrated their strength whether they went to Moscow or not. I say to those in the gallery today: every single athlete who competes for our country on the national stage is loved, admired, cherished, supported and celebrated. We look forward with pride and anticipation to the next chapter of Australia's Olympic story. MINISTRY 52 MINISTRY Temporary Arrangements 52 14:09 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I inform the House that the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry will be absent from question time today and tomorrow. The Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government will answer questions on her behalf. An incident having occurred in the gallery— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 53 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Medicare 53 14:10 Ms LEY 00AMN Farrer My question is to the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister has said, on at least 71 occasions, that it is free to see a GP and all you need is your Medicare card, not your credit card. But the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare has contradicted the Prime Minister with data showing Australians paid more than $166 million in out-of-pocket costs to see a GP in the month of May alone. Why does the Prime Minister say things he knows are untrue? 14:10 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for her question. We're strengthening Medicare. We are cementing quality, bulk-billed health care at its heart. It's something we are absolutely committed to and something that I announced in the electorate of Bass with the $8½ billion commitment that, before I had finished speaking, the coalition then backed in. They backed in that position. Back in 2023, in the budget, we tripled the bulk-billing incentive for pensioners and concession card holders. When those 11 million Australians go to the GP, they're bulk-billed 90 per cent of the time. It is our plan for Medicare in action, and it is working. That is why we took that principle and then made a decision to extend it to all 26 million Australians for the very first time, lifting bulk-billing rates for every patient to 90 per cent by 2030. This is an important part of the reform agenda, where Labor not only created Medicare but will always work to strengthen it. I know it annoys those opposite to see this little bit of green and gold. Green and gold are the same colours that our athletes proudly wear. Why do they wear the green and gold? It's because it's a source of Australian pride. Just as we take pride in Australian athletes—I see Emma McKeon up there and Jess Fox; I see some great athletes of the past, the present and, indeed, the future—we take enormous pride in the fact that, unlike some countries, where people can't get health care because they don't have the money to pay for it, here in Australia, we have a different system. The SPEAKER 53517 Order! I want to hear the Leader of the Opposition on her point of order. Ms Ley 00AMN With your indulgence, it's clear with the noise in the gallery, the Prime Minister didn't actually hear my question. May I repeat it? The SPEAKER 53517 No. Order! I heard the question. If I heard the question, the Prime Minister would have heard the question. It was easy. Resume your seat. If you wish to take a point of order on relevance, you can do so. Ms Ley 00AMN A point of order on relevance: I highlighted the more than $166 million in out-of-pocket costs to see a GP and asked the Prime Minister why it is that he does not tell the truth. You do need your credit card as well as your Medicare card. The SPEAKER 53517 Resume your seat. I remind the Leader of the Opposition not to add additional remarks during her point. The Prime Minister has the call. Mr ALBANESE R36 That is exactly why we are doing this—so that we allow more people to see a GP for free. But there's a big distinction between the two sides of the parliament. We, on this side, think that people value Medicare because of what it says about our country—that we look after people. The other side say things like this: The price signal is about somebody paying a bit extra when they go to the doctor and not receiving a bulk-billed consultation … That's what we mean by the price signal, and I think that's vital. Who said that? It was the health minister at the time—the health minister who followed Peter Dutton, who tried to abolish bulk billing altogether. (Time expired) DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 53 DISTINGUISHED VISITORS Republic of Korea: Parliamentary Delegation 53 14:14 The SPEAKER 53517 I'm pleased to inform the House that, today, we are joined by Chairman Kim Jin-pyo, the Special Envoy representing the President of the Republic of Korea and the former Speaker of Korea's National Assembly and his distinguished delegation. On behalf of all members, I wish you a very warm welcome to Australia and, particularly, to the House of Representatives. Honourable members: Hear, hear! QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 53 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Albanese Government 53 14:15 Ms KARA COOK 316537 Bonner My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, how is the Albanese Labor government delivering on its commitments to the Australian people to build Australia's future? 14:15 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for Bonner for her question, and I congratulate her on her first speech and on the fantastic campaign that she ran. I was a regular visitor to the electorate of Bonner, including medical centres, announcing an urgent care clinic there so that more people can see the doctor for free. We went to the election saying that we would build Australia's future. One of the things that you need to do that, a precondition, is building a stronger economy. Today's inflation number is certainly good news for that. Today's inflation number says that annual inflation is down to 2.1 per cent, 12 full months in the RBA band. Here's a comparison for you. When we came to office, the quarterly inflation rate for the March 2022 quarter was the same number. Under the former government, it was 2.1 per cent in a quarter. Under this government, it's 2.1 per cent in a year. That's making an enormous difference. The combination of lower inflation, higher wages and lower taxes, quarter after quarter, means that people are earning more and keeping more of what they earn, making an enormous difference. Building Australia's future also means looking after the next generation, supporting parents to combat the harms of social media so every child can have a childhood. That's a commitment that I made again today. I've been meeting courageous parents who've lost their children and reiterating that social media has a social responsibility. We want young Australians out onto the netball courts, tennis courts, swimming pools and football ovals. We want them off their devices and engaging with each other and growing as young people. This change, which I thought had bipartisan support, is absolutely critical going forward. Building Australia's future also means strengthening Medicare. It means building a better and fairer education system. The legislation to cut student debt by 20 per cent, make free TAFE permanent nationwide and fully fund every single school will make a difference there. We delivered on 1 July a range of cost-of-living measures. We will continue to focus every day on making a positive difference to people's lives, because that is what good government looks like. Economy 54 14:18 Ms LEY 00AMN Farrer My question is to the Prime Minister. This afternoon on Sky News the out-of-touch Treasurer described today's inflation numbers as 'absolutely outstanding'. But, according to the ABS, under three years of Labor the cost of eggs has increased by 34 per cent, the cost of bread by 18 per cent and the cost of cereal by 17 per cent. Prime Minister, why does the Treasurer say things he knows are untrue? The SPEAKER 53517 Before I call the Treasurer, I've been very clear about this. There are not going to be descriptors in questions, the same as last term. That's the same for people asking and answering questions as well. So I'm going to ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw that part of the question, the descriptor. Ms Ley 00AMN Speaker, I withdraw the descriptor from the question. 14:19 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin Let me get this straight. On Monday they asked us about the unemployment rate, when this government has presided over the lowest average unemployment in the last 50 years of any government. Then they asked us about Medicare, when we've just been re-elected on a platform of strengthening Medicare. And now, on a day when we get absolutely outstanding inflation numbers, they want to ask us about inflation. I'm asked in particular about food inflation. I want to make it very clear for the member for Farrer that when we came to office food inflation was running at 5.9 per cent, and now it's about half that, at 3.0 per cent. So, if the member for Farrer is unhappy about food inflation, she must be absolutely livid at the underperformance of her own government, a government that she was a cabinet minister in. When we came to office, inflation had a six in front of it, and it was absolutely galloping. And because of the work we've done together, because of what Australians have been able to achieve together, we have got these absolutely outstanding numbers today. They're outstanding because they are a powerful demonstration of the progress Australians have made together in the fight against inflation. I'm asked about particular elements of the new numbers today. Rent inflation has gone down. Housing construction cost inflation has gone down. Food and non-alcoholic beverages inflation has gone down. Fruit and vegetables inflation has gone down. Insurance and financial services inflation has gone down. That's why we've seen today both underlying and headline inflation in the Reserve Bank's target band and headline inflation at the very bottom of the band. Monthly inflation is below the Reserve Bank's target band; it actually has a one in front of it in these numbers today. So I hope those opposite keep asking me about the inflation data today, because the inflation data today was very, very encouraging. We know from that question that nothing makes them grumpier than when Australians make progress in their economy together, whether it's the fact that inflation is much lower than we inherited, that real wages are growing again or that unemployment is low. We got their debt down, we delivered two surpluses and interest rates have started to come down as well. We know there's more work to do, because people are still under pressure. That's why this month we're rolling out more help with the cost of living, much of which was opposed by those opposite. Social Media 55 14:22 Ms BRISKEY 263427 Maribyrnong My question is to the Minister for Communications. How is the Albanese Labor government protecting the next generation of Australians from the perversive pool of social media and giving parents across the country peace of mind? 14:23 Ms WELLS 264121 Lilley I thank the member for Maribyrnong for her question. As a psychologist and a fierce advocate for Australian families, she knows the importance of the protection of the wellbeing of Australian kids. Give our kids 36 more months—it was a simple request for a complicated issue that has now created generational change. It was a request made by an army of 150,000 parents, like Mia, Rob and Emma, who came to this place today to take the next step on our collective mission to reduce online harms experienced by young Australians. Today the Albanese government again shows its commitment to putting families at the heart of our decision-making, tabling the rules of Australia's world-leading social media minimum-age laws. In response to advice from the eSafety Commission, the online safety rules tabled today specify which types of online services will not be captured by the social media law, including health and education, messaging apps and games. These types of online services have been excluded from the minimum-age obligations because they pose fewer social media harms to under-16s or are regulated under different laws. We are implementing these rules and this law on behalf of parents who want and deserve better protections for their kids online, which is why I want to be clear about YouTube. I was required by the law to seek advice from the eSafety Commissioner on the draft rules, and the eSafety Commissioner's advice was clear. Four out of 10 Australian kids have had their most recent or most harmful experience on YouTube, and, on top of that, YouTube uses the same persuasive design features as other social media platforms, like infinite scroll, autoplay and algorithmic feeds. Against this content and these features ubiquitous across all social media platforms, our kids don't stand a chance, and that is why I accepted the eSafety Commissioner's recommendation that YouTube should not be treated differently from other social media platforms. I will not be intimidated by legal threats, when this is a genuine fight for the wellbeing of Australian kids, a fight to help Mia, Rob and Emma change lives. There is no perfect solution when it comes to keeping younger Australians safe online. We accept that, but the social media minimum-age laws will make a meaningful difference. There's a place for social media, but there's not a place for predatory algorithms that cause our children harm. DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 55 DISTINGUISHED VISITORS Firman, Councillor Rick, OAM, Webb, Councillor Russell, Fitzpatrick, Councillor Russell, Greiner, Hon. Nicholas Frank Hugo (Nick), AC 55 14:25 The SPEAKER 53517 I'm pleased to advice the House that in the gallery today is Councillor Rick Firman, Councillor Russell Webb and Councillor Russell Fitzpatrick, mayors from Temora, Tamworth and Bega Valley, and also I've been advised that the Hon. Nick Greiner AC, who served as the 37th premier of New South Wales from 1988 to 1992, is in the chamber. Welcome to you all. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 55 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Tertiary Education 55 14:26 Ms LE 295676 Fowler Prime Minister, your government's 20 per cent student debt reduction will be welcome by some, but many more will miss out. Last term I introduced my bill, Higher Education Support Amendment (Fair Study and Opportunity) Bill 2024, to reverse the Morrison government's punitive fee hikes for arts students, which saw costs double from around $20,000 to $50,000, hitting students in Fowler the hardest. Your one-off reduction doesn't fix this. Will you support my bill when I reintroduce it or allow this 80 per cent increase to unfairly burden many students? 14:26 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for Fowler for her question, and, of course, she wasn't here when the Morrison government made those changes to education, which is what she is talking about. She has been here in the chamber and, I know, supported the reduction in student debt that passed this parliament today and will pass the Senate as well, if it hasn't already. That will benefit 23,000 people in the electorate of Fowler. Twenty-three thousand people will benefit by an average of $5½ thousand each—students who have studied to get a better start in life at university and people either training or retraining through TAFE, making an enormous difference across the board. What's more is that people will benefit from the changes in the thresholds that we have made and the changes to indexation that we have made. The students in her electorate and others will benefit as well from free TAFE that we are making permanent, which has already benefited over half a million Australians, many of whom would have been in the member's electorate. We will continue to support good government legislation. We have come into this place in the first fortnight and have concentrated on the first introduction being things that make that practical difference to people's lives and that we were re-elected on, whether they be the changes to student debt and that reduction; the changes in the threshold; the changes to how much people have to pay back and when, which will put more dollars in people's pockets; or the support for cheaper medicines that we've also done in this parliament that will benefit so many people in the electorate of Fowler. What we are determined to do, each and every day, is to focus on the issues that people in her electorate and electorates like hers are most concerned about. That is how we make their lives better, how we increase opportunity, how we support aspiration and how we make sure that no-one gets left behind and no-one gets held back. Education 56 14:29 Mr ABDO 316915 Calwell My question is to the Minister for Education. What is the Albanese Labor government doing to build a better and fairer education system and improve students' wellbeing? What other approaches is the government being asked to consider? 14:29 Mr CLARE HWL Blaxland I thank my friend the member for Calwell for his question and congratulate him on his extraordinary first speech—one of the best I have ever heard, and there's been some brilliant first speeches in the last few weeks in this chamber. Some encouraging news: NAPLAN results are out today, and they show improvements in literacy and in numeracy. In reading, we've seen improvements in years 5, 7 and 9, and, in numeracy, we've seen some real improvements right across the board. This is the first time that this has happened in almost 10 years. All of this is encouraging, but the cold, hard truth is that there is a lot more work to do. What the NAPLAN data shows us each and every year is that about one-in-10 students are below the minimum standards that we set for them, but it is one-in-three children from poor families and from regional Australia. These are the same kids who often end up not finishing high school. That's why the agreements that we've now signed with all states and territories are so important. They're about fixing the funding of our public schools and targeting that funding to where it's needed. That funding is not a blank cheque; it's tied to real and practical reforms: things like phonics checks and numeracy checks in year 1, to help identify children who need additional support, that is rolling out in states and territories this year and next year; things like evidence based teaching, explicit teaching, to help children learn; and catch-up tutoring or small-group tutoring to help children who fall behind to catch up and to keep up. And from January of next year, the reforms that all states and territories have now agreed to, to teacher training at universities, will also roll out. All of this is critical to help build a better and a fairer education system. The Minister for Communications has just given us an update on social media reforms. We've already banned mobile phones in schools. We're already seeing a real-life example of the sort of difference that it's making. Teachers tell us that children are more focused in the classroom. They also tell us that our playgrounds at lunchtime are noisier. Kids are playing and talking to each other, rather than doomscrolling. But when school finishes, you know what happens. You see it, if you drive past a bus stop at three o'clock. You can see kids with their heads down, looking at their phones, back into the cesspit of social media. We know the impact this is having on our children, on their health and their mental health, and how it is used to bully and belittle other children. This is doing something about it. This is a really important step to help our parents, but, even more importantly, to help our kids. Energy Prices 56 14:32 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon My question is to the Minster for Climate Change and Energy. Electricity prices are now 32 per cent up, since Labor came to office. Some households are paying more than $1,300 for their electricity. Minister, do you still stand by the Prime Minister's commitment to the Australian people of a $275 cut to power bills by the end of this year? Or is the Prime Minister saying things he knows aren't true? 14:33 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon I thank the honourable member for the question. I'm a little surprised he didn't reference today's CPI figures. But perhaps I shouldn't be, because it shows energy prices are down 6.2 per cent on the year. Perhaps that's an explanation. Or perhaps another explanation is that is in no small part due to the government's energy bill relief, which the honourable member opposed. That's another possible explanation for why he missed that fact, although he did reference $1,300, which is roughly the amount you can save by installing a cheaper home battery, under the Albanese government's policy. So I thank the honourable member for the plug. Housing 57 14:34 Ms JARRETT 298574 Brisbane My question is to the Minister for Housing, Homelessness and Cities. How is the Albanese government delivering on its commitment to build more homes, and is the minister aware of any alternative approaches? 14:34 Ms O'NEIL 140590 Hotham I thank the member for Brisbane for her question. She's already a fierce advocate for delivering more homes in her community, and I know she takes great pride in being part of a government which is tackling the housing crisis from every angle. We've got a housing crisis in our country because for 40 years our country hasn't been building enough homes. That's why most of the $43 billion we are investing to address this problem is going to building, building, building. We're making really important progress on this. In the last term in parliament about half a million homes were built around the country, and we're on the pathway to 55,000 desperately needed social and affordable homes to come online. As a nation, we've got to do more. No-one accepts that more than our government. That's why, in our second term, we're going to build on these foundations and go bigger, bolder and faster. I'm asked about alternative approaches. We have seen quite a few. First, we saw the coalition spend nine wasteful years in government doing absolutely nothing about this problem. You'll remember me mentioning last term that the coalition were so checked out of housing as an issue that for most of the time they were in government they didn't even have a housing minister. They spent the last three years in opposition in this parliament trying to slow us down or block our positive approaches. They delayed housing for people experiencing homelessness, they delayed housing for women and children fleeing family violence and they delayed new housing coming onto the mainstream housing market. Then they brought to the election something I thought I would never see: a housing policy that would have built fewer homes in this country and made existing housing more expensive through their dud 'super for housing' policy. I didn't think this could get any worse. Indeed, I approached this parliament with a sense of hope and optimism. We got the first question in the parliament on housing—I felt fantastic about that—and we had an opposition saying they wanted to be constructive. But yesterday my hopes were absolutely dashed. The first move this opposition have decided to make on housing is to try to bulldoze the construction of 80,000 desperately needed new rental homes—80,000 new quality rental homes. Trying to block this proposal is crazy, is bizarre and is exactly the opposite of what our country needs to be doing. It makes me really worried that they have learnt nothing and heard nothing from the very clear message on housing that was sent to all of us at the May election. Our government is back to work. We're focused on the cost of living, on housing and on Medicare. The coalition are busy fighting culture wars against non-existent enemies and taking the old coalition brand of destruction and dysfunction into the new term. Now, they have a choice this parliament: are they going to continue to be housing hypocrites, or are they going to come with us and work on this great national challenge that our government is confronting? DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 57 DISTINGUISHED VISITORS Abib, Mr Mark Victor 57 14:37 The SPEAKER 53517 I'm pleased to advise that, in the southern gallery, former minister and former senator the Hon. Mark Abib is joining us today. Honourable members: Hear, hear! QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 57 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Energy 57 14:38 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon My question is for the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. Minister, do you still stand by your government's commitment to cut power bills by $275 by the end of the year? 14:38 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon The honourable member refers to modelling done in 2021, which we took to the Australian people in 2022. The Australian people also had a chance to have their say in 2025 on the matter of competing plans for energy prices. We accept that judgement of the people. We accept it modestly, the Australian people's judgement on 3 May. Perhaps the Australian people looked at the fact that energy prices have fallen, as I just said, by 6.2 per cent in the year just gone. They would know that that wasn't inevitable. Prices would have been 16.6 per cent higher if the honourable member had had his way and energy bill relief had not applied. That was a key difference. They also know that the opposition went to the election with a very significant plan. We've always recognised that it has a very significant plan on energy. The Australian people passed judgement on that. They knew that that plan would lead to higher energy bills— The SPEAKER 53517 Order. The minister will pause so the member for Wannon can make his point of order. Mr Tehan 210911 My point goes to relevance. The question was a very simple, straightforward one—do you stand by your government's commitment? That's what the Australian people would like to hear answered. The SPEAKER 53517 Resume your seat. The minister was not asked about alternative approaches. He wasn't asked about the opposition. I'm going to draw him back to the question that he was asked. He can talk about the question. He was asked about government policy, but, if he continues on with the opposition, I shall sit him down. Mr BOWEN DZS I was asked if we stand by things, and we do stand by our policy to reduce energy prices by introducing the cheapest form of energy, which is renewable, and rejecting plans to introduce the most expensive form of energy. We stand by the election commitment we made in the election just gone to deliver cheaper home batteries for people, and that is a policy which is being delivered and taken up by the Australian people with great enthusiasm. The Australian people rejected those alternatives and gave this government a mandate to keep going. Economy 58 14:40 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo My question is to the Treasurer. What does the latest economic data tell us, and what progress has been made in the government's fight against inflation? 14:40 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin I thank the member for Bendigo for her question and also for her focus on the cost of living, which saw her decisively returned to this place at the election. Today we did get an outstanding set of inflation numbers for the June quarter and also for the month of June. Those new figures from the ABS showed that headline and underlying inflation have now both fallen to their lowest levels in almost four years. This was better than most economists were expecting, and it is better than the forecasts which were in the budget I handed down in March. Headline inflation is 2.1 per cent through the year to June, down from 2.4 per cent to March. Headline inflation has now been in the band for a full year, as the Prime Minister said. Trimmed mean inflation is 2.7 per cent, down from 2.9 per cent. Monthly inflation is now below the Reserve Bank's target range. These are really welcome, and they are really encouraging numbers. When we came to office, headline inflation was 6.1 per cent and rising. It's now about a third of that. When we came to office, underlying inflation was 4.9 per cent and rising. It's now almost half of that. These numbers are a very powerful generation of the progress that Australians have made together in the fight against inflation—quarterly and monthly inflation down, headline and underlying inflation down, goods and services inflation down, tradeable and non-tradeable inflation down. Today inflation has come down on all of the major measures, and that is a very welcome development. It's especially welcome when you consider that Australians have made this progress at the same time as more Australians are in work, earning more and keeping more of what they earn. No major advanced economy has achieved what Australia has been able to achieve—inflation in the low twos, unemployment in the low fours and three years of continuous economic growth. At the same time that inflation is going up in the US, the UK, Canada and New Zealand, it's coming down here in Australia. We've got real wages and living standards growing again. We've delivered two surpluses. We got the debt down, and interest rates have been coming down as well. But we know that there is more work to do, we know that there are still persistent structural issues in our economy, we know the global environment is uncertain, we know that growth is soft in our economy, and we know that people are under pressure. That's why we're rolling out more cost-of-living relief this month. It's why we are focused on making sure that we can make our economy more productive and more resilient and our budget more sustainable. It's why responsible economic management is a defining feature of this government, and you saw the fruits of that today in the inflation numbers. Energy 58 14:43 Mr HOGAN 218019 Page My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. Is the average household electricity bill in Australia today $275 cheaper than May 2022? 14:44 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon The average energy bill today is 6.2 per cent cheaper than it was last year. That's the fact. As I said before, those opposite asked these questions last term, which was fair game, and we answered those questions, and then we took a plan to the Australian people on 3 May. Those opposite took a different plan, and the Australian people cast judgment on those plans. This side of the House said we will keep going with a plan to produce the cheapest form of energy. That's what we said in 2022; that's what the honourable member refers to. Then we repeated that in 2025. We said we will build on that success, and then we said we recognise there is so much more to do. That's why we said we'd also help with cheaper home batteries. That's why I'm pleased to inform the House and the honourable member that in the last four weeks 17,324 Australian households have installed batteries. Do you know where most of those have been? The outer suburbs and the regions of Australia, like the one represented by the honourable member—a policy he opposed! This was the choice that the Australian people cast judgement on on 3 May. Health Care 59 14:45 Dr REID 300126 Robertson My question is to the Minister for Health and Ageing. How are medicines listed on the PBS helping to improve the lives of Australians? Why is the government so determined to make PBS medicines cheaper for Australians, and why is this necessary? 14:45 Mr BUTLER HWK Hindmarsh It is so terrific to see the member for Robertson back in this chamber. He's a great local member, now down that end of the chamber, and he's also a terrific source of advice for those of us in the health portfolio. He knows that the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, the PBS, is one of the core pillars of Australia's world-leading healthcare system. Established by yet another Labor government almost 80 years ago, it delivers Australians affordable access to the world's best medicines, and our government has been working hard to make those medicines even more affordable. Four waves of cheaper medicines policies in the last term of parliament have already delivered Australians a saving of about $1½ billion, but those huge savings don't account for the benefits of the almost 350 new listings on the PBS that our government has made—including, for example, the eight women's health drugs that I talked about in yesterday's question time. Earlier this month we also expanded access to the life-saving wonder drug Trikafta. For the first time, people with cystic fibrosis who have rare and ultrarare mutations will have access to that drug. One of those hundreds of patients is Nathan Charles, who joined the member for Robertson, the cystic fibrosis community and me in Sydney to announce this listing. Nathan was diagnosed with cystic fibrosis as a little infant, and his mum was told that she shouldn't expect him to survive childhood. Not only did he survive; he also went on to represent Australia as part of the Wallabies—the only person on the planet who has played contact sport at an elite level with cystic fibrosis. Without PBS listing Trikafta costs about $250,000 a year. I have spoken to families—I think the member for Robertson was there—who had to remortgage their house to give their sick kids access to that drug. Many others, obviously, didn't have that opportunity, and they just had to go without. Now Nathan and hundreds of patients like him will get access to this drug not for $250,000 but for $31 a script. Next year that price will come down even further, to just $25 a script, if the bill that I introduced to the parliament this morning passes over the course of the coming few weeks. When we first listed Trikafta three years ago Australia was a relative late-comer to this wonder drug. But, with this, the fourth expansion of the listing we've already made in just three years, Australia is now the global leader in equity of access to this drug for the cystic fibrosis community. That is the value of Australia's PBS, and that is why we will never give it up. Fossil Fuel Industry 59 14:48 Ms BOELE 26417 Bradfield My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. The Climate Council has advised that Australia's 2035 climate target will not be credible unless it includes a commitment to an orderly phase-out of fossil fuel use, production and exports. As a hopeful host to COP31 and to respond to the pleas of our friends in the Pacific, what is the Australian government's plan for that fossil fuel phase-out? 14:49 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon I thank the honourable member for her question, and I say to the honourable member, as I'd say to the Climate Council, the way to reduce fossil fuel use is to build renewable energy. You can't wish away fossil fuels. You can't have a plan to reduce fossil fuel use in Australia or overseas unless you have a plan to build renewable energy. That's what we're doing at home and that's what we're doing abroad. Just yesterday, I announced the expansion of the Capacity Investment Scheme of 8 gigawatts. This is no small thing. Those opposite— Opposition members interjecting— Mr BOWEN DZS I apologise, I should have give an trigger warning when I mentioned renewable energy. That's on me. That building of renewable energy is the key to a lower emissions energy system, a more reliable energy system and a cheaper energy system. In the last financial year, we saw 4.4 gigawatts of new renewable energy connected—not investment decisions, not plans, but up and running, built and operating and providing energy to Australian houses and industries today. But, even more impressive, there were more than 15 gigawatts which received connection approvals, which means they're coming; they're in the pipeline. That is a massive pipeline of investment for Australia. When it comes to internationally, I'd make a similar point. You simply can't say that we can abolish fossil fuels or fossil fuel exports and make a difference, unless you are working with countries to reduce their use of fossil fuels. When the Prime Minister recently went to China, green iron was a centrepiece of his visit—a visit that was so immaturely criticised by those opposite, which showed that they just don't get it when it comes to relationships with major trading partners. That's the sort of work that the Prime Minister has also done in his landmark agreement with the Prime Minister of India, which is working to see them embrace more renewable energy and Australia's renewable energy exports. That's the sort of agreement and working together that is hard work—harder than issuing a press release or calling for something. That is hard work, domestically and internationally, which sees real emissions reduction. That's what we see more and more. I've also been in discussions with the new administration in South Korea on similar plans to work more closely on Australia's renewable energy future and renewable energy exports, which will see emissions come down in Australia and overseas. That's what real reform looks like. It's not issuing a press release. It's not calling for a slogan; it is hard work at home and abroad, and that's what this prime minister and this government do. Antisemitism 60 14:52 Mr BURNS 278522 Macnamara My question is to the Minister for Home Affairs. What actions have been taken today in respect of the investigation into the Adass Israel Synagogue arson attack? 14:52 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I thank the member for Macnamara for the question and note that no member of parliament wants to have in their electorate the situation where we see the sort of hate crime that the member for Macnamara dealt with, with the synagogue fire at the Adass Isreal Synagogue. Earlier today, Australian Federal Police executed seven different search warrants at locations across Melbourne as part of Operation Hillfield—the investigation into the arson attack at the Adass Israel Synagogue. Federal Police have today arrested a 21-year-old man who is alleged to be one of three people responsible for the attack on the Adass Israel Synagogue in December last year. I want to acknowledge the patience of the Jewish community. People, when there is an attack as reprehensible as this, want to see someone being charged immediately, understandably, but there is always a tension between wanting to see immediate action and making sure that the investigation gets to every person involved. While the attack happened last year, the wounds from that attack are still raw. As Deputy Commissioner Barrett said today, the investigation is not limited to Australia. The Federal Police are investigating criminals offshore who are suspected of working with criminal associates in Victoria to carry out the attack. This follows the arrest two weeks ago of another individual who was charged over his alleged role into the theft of a vehicle used by those involved in the attack. I want to thank, on behalf of the government—and I think fair to say the parliament and the nation —the more than 200 members of the Joint Counter Terrorism Team from across the Australian Federal Police, the Victorian police and ASIO. Together, they have worked more than 50,000 hours on this investigation, and they continue to do so. Following the horrific attack last year, the site was visited by the Prime Minister, the member for Macnamara and members of the government, and by myself on two occasions. I remember going the second time with the member for Macnamara, which would have been more than a week after the attack. You could still smell the smoke as though it was fresh and you could still see at your feet the rubble of the Torah, which had been burnt. The government committed $250,000 almost immediately for the restoration and replacement of those Torah scrolls. In this year's budget, a further $30 million was committed to rebuild the synagogue and the community centre. It's not widely known, but in the week following the attack, the Prime Minister had raised with me that the rabbi and his family were on a temporary visa, which was soon to expire. Given that, in an act of horrific hate, people had tried to say that the members of the Jewish community and that rabbi, in particular, were not welcome in Australia, I took, on behalf of the government, the most deliberate action you can take which was, that week, to make him and every member of his family permanent residents of Australia, to say they belong. The hatred doesn't. This arrest cannot undo the pain and fear that it caused, but it does send the strongest message that this kind of hate and violence has no place in Australia. This attack was not simply an attack on Jewish Australians. An attack on a synagogue is an attack on Australia and is treated as such. Jewish Australians, like all Australians, have the right to feel safe and to be safe. 14:56 Ms LEY 00AMN Farrer on indulgence—I associate the opposition with the remarks of the minister, and thank him for updating the House on the ongoing investigation into the horrific crime at the Adass Israel synagogue and the arrest. It's pleasing to know that the rebuilding of the synagogue and the community centre is going ahead. I want to commend the work of the joint counterterrorism unit and the AFP, and to say that we in the opposition—and I know the government shares these concerns about the rising tide of antisemitism in this country and the expression of that—believe that incidents such as this and, more recently, at the East Melbourne synagogue are not something we should ever accept in this country and we should strive continually to educate more, do more and encourage more to dispel that tide. Energy 61 14:57 Ms ALDRED 11788 Monash My question is to the Prime Minister. On 22 July 2025, the Prime Minister said Australian power bills were being permanently reduced. But Red Energy, Australia's fourth-largest energy retailer, has confirmed it will raise energy prices on Victorian families by over four per cent, hitting over 230,000 Aussies with another power bill increase of around $50. Why does the Prime Minister say things he knows are untrue? 14:57 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon I thank the honourable member for the question and congratulate her on her first question in this House. The honourable member—it's her first term, so she wouldn't have been here when the member for Hume hid an energy price rise before the 2022 election. Perhaps that's why the honourable member got the job, because it's a difficult job. I congratulate the opposition, too, for their temerity on asking about energy matters this week, given the chaos we've seen from honourable members opposite. But the fact of the matter is, on these matters, under this government, we not only have policy but we have transparency. When we have difficult figures, we don't change the law to hide them like the member for Hume did just before the 2022 federal election, which should disqualify him from ministerial office forever! The SPEAKER 53517 Order. The minister will pause. I can't hear a word. There's too much noise, but I want to hear from the Manager of Opposition Business. Mr Hawke HWO The point of order, unsurprisingly, is on relevance. Question time is at 2 pm every day, but the minister seems unprepared to answer questions today on his own portfolio. The question was about price rises under his government, and he's referring to previous government policy and previous governments over and over. The SPEAKER 53517 I'm going to send another clear signal—I think you know where this is heading—if anyone is taking a point of order, you don't add extra commentary. You just simply state the point of order without giving any other commentary. That rambling is outside the point of order and the standing orders. Moving forward, we won't be having that, otherwise points of order won't be taken. The minister, while he's at it, can return back to the question. He wasn't asked about alternative policies, but I couldn't hear a word he was saying. It's going to assist everyone if we can listen to what the minister is saying. Mr BOWEN DZS The honourable member asked about the Prime Minister's comments about permanent energy bill reductions, and I'm very glad she did, because what the Prime Minister was referring to was the permanent energy bill reductions you get when you install a cheaper home battery under the Albanese Labor government's policy; 17,324 households across the country have done it. If you already have solar panels it reduces your bills by $1,100 a year on average, and if you don't have solar panels yet, $2,300 on average, across the country, which is around 90 per cent of the typical bill. So the Prime Minister was well within his rights to point out not only that it is a policy we took to the election but also that it is a policy we have been implementing and delivering successfully since 1 July, just a few weeks after we received that instruction from the Australian people. We've been getting on with the job and delivering it, and the places that have taken up that offer the most have been the people of the outer suburbs and regions of Australia. They know that what's good for their household is good for the country, and that is the cheapest form of energy available for Australia, and that's renewables. Australia-UK Ministerial Consultations 61 15:01 Ms STANLEY 265990 Werriwa My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister. What are the key outcomes of AUKMIN and consultations held over the past weekend? And what key achievements were achieved in progressing AUKUS? 15:01 Mr MARLES HWQ Corio Can I thank the member for her question and congratulate her on her re-election to this place. Last Friday the annual AUKMIN meetings happened with myself and the foreign minister—the annual 2+2 defence and foreign minister meeting with the United Kingdom. We met with UK foreign secretary David Lammy and UK defence secretary John Healey. Our relationship with the United Kingdom is obviously the oldest relationship we have. It is characterised by deep people-to-people links and a great history which informs so much of modern Australia today—our system of government, our language and the way in which we organise our security and our defence forces. Our economic relationship is such that, for both nations, we are each other's second largest investment partner. But with the advent of AUKUS it is hard to overstate the significance of the UK decision to build, sustain and operate their future attack-class submarines as the same class of submarines that will be operated by Australia. This is a huge decision, which is the fundamental bilateral component of the trilateral AUKUS arrangement. On Saturday we signed the Geelong Treaty between myself and the UK secretary of defence, John Healey. This is the treaty that provides the underpinning of those bilateral arrangements that sit under the architecture of AUKUS. And of course AUKUS itself is embodied in a trilateral treaty, which I signed on behalf of Australia in Washington DC in August of last year. All of this means that there is today a strategic, contemporary dimension to this oldest of our relationships. It really is elevating our relationship with the United Kingdom to the very highest order, and this is all being built upon the bedrock of trust that has always been there between both countries. I know I speak on behalf of the foreign minister when I say we are deeply grateful to both David Lammy and John Healey at a personal level for the personal relationships we have with them. This is now the second AUKMIN we have done as a group of four, and I can say to this House that the level of trust that exists between the four of us is so important in terms of being able to accelerate the agenda we have between our two countries, which is pursuing a relationship that is now right there amongst the most important relationships our nation has. National Reconstruction Fund 62 15:04 Ms CHANEY 300006 Curtin This is a question for the Minister for Defence Industry, representing the Minister for Industry and Science. In 2023 the government established the National Reconstruction Fund, with an announced $15 billion to crowd in investment in emerging industries and technologies. Two years later, despite the urgent need to unlock private investment in the transition to net zero, it appears that less than five per cent of this has actually been invested. Why isn't it moving faster? 15:04 Mr CONROY 249127 Shortland I thank the member for her question and her strong commitment to seizing the opportunities from the transition that are available to us. The National Reconstruction Fund is one part of our plan for a future made in Australia especially focused on seizing the opportunities from that transition. I'm delighted to inform the House that, since it was established less than two years ago, it has made nine investments, worth over $430 million. It's investing in innovative technologies and local manufacturing which will help the transition. For example, the NRF has invested $200 million in Arafura Rare Earths Ltd. This will deliver the rare earth minerals essential for renewables and the energy grid of the future. These investments will ramp up over time, but, as I said, the fund was established less than two years ago. This is only one part of this government's commitment to seizing the opportunities of the global race to net zero, and I talked about a few of those yesterday. They include production tax credits for critical minerals and renewable hydrogen; $2 billion to transition the Australian aluminium smelters to renewable energy; and $1 billion in the Green Iron Investment Fund. This Green Iron Investment Fund is critical for decarbonising Australia but also for decarbonising the world. It was also a feature of the Prime Minister's trip to China. This will complement what the National Reconstruction Fund is doing and the investments it is making. Other complements of the National Reconstruction Fund include the Clean Energy Finance Corporation's investments. Last year the Clean Energy Finance Corporation committed $4.7 billion to that decarbonisation agenda. The member, in her question, talked about leveraging private-sector investment in this transition, and I'm delighted to inform the member that the CEFC has been leveraging $4.14 of private-sector capital for every dollar of public-sector investment. So that $4 billion unlocked $25.7 billion of total investment and supported over 4,000 jobs. ARENA has also been really successful at leveraging private-sector capital. The SPEAKER 53517 I'll take a point of order from the member for Curtin. Ms Chaney 300006 On relevance, the question was about the speed of the rollout of the NRF, not other things that they're doing outside the NRF. The SPEAKER 53517 The minister shall return to the question. I know he's being directly relevant about the project, but he's got another 40 seconds to answer the question. I'll be listening carefully to make sure he is being directly relevant. Mr CONROY 249127 As I said at the outset in answering the member's question, in less than two years the NRF has made over $400 million worth of investments, including a very significant $200 million investment in Arafura, and we expect it to ramp up over time. The minister has given directions to the fund's administrators. Importantly, as I said, this is one part of this government's commitment to seizing the opportunities from a transition to net zero—grabbing the job opportunities that are there for governments to take action on climate change and are happy to invest in the private sector. I thank the member for her question. Infrastructure 63 15:08 Ms FRANCE 270198 Dickson My question is to the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government. How will the Albanese Labor government's record investments in infrastructure support communities across the country? Why is this investment needed? 15:08 Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR Ballarat I thank the member for Dickson very much for that question and particularly for her support of infrastructure investment and her longstanding advocacy for upgrades to the Dohles Rocks Road in Queensland, a project that is now underway, thanks to this government. This government is making a record investment in infrastructure across our cities and our regions—a pipeline of projects across the next 10 years, with a record $125 billion of investment. That record investment stretches right across the country, throughout our regions and throughout our cities, our towns and our suburbs—projects that enhance the productivity of our industries, improve safety for our road users, connect us with our loved ones and save us time when we're travelling to and from work. In Queensland, we are, of course, delivering an unprecedented investment into the Bruce Highway, including our historic $7.2 billion safety package, all of which is in regional Queensland. We're delivering the Rockhampton Ring Road that was dramatically underfunded by the former coalition government and stage 1 of Sunshine Coast rail, to get it to Caloundra. We are also delivering in Queensland the Olympics infrastructure that will leave a lasting legacy for generations to come. In New South Wales, Western Sydney airport is nearly complete. We're delivering critical road infrastructure in Western Sydney: Fifteenth Avenue, and Mamre Road and Elizabeth Drive. These were long neglected by those opposite. We're delivering the new Richmond Bridge, the Muswellbrook Bypass and, of course, Coulsons Creek Road in New England. In Victoria, Sunshine Station, Melbourne Airport Rail link, North East Link, Western Freeway upgrades and, of course, the Princes Freeway as well continues to receive investment. Down in Tassie, we've delivered and opened the Bridgewater Bridge, we're investing in the Mornington Roundabout and the Lyell Highway. In South Australia, we're delivering the Torrens to Darlington project, Whyalla Airport opened just recently and the Mount Barker to Verdun interchange upgrades—and in Western Australia, the METRONET, Brooking Channel Bridge, Bunbury Outer Ring Road and more. In the Northern Territory, we're improving the Tanami Outback Way, investing in Middle Arm and also the Stuart Highway between Katherine and Darwin, and here, in the ACT—the light rail, the Molonglo River Bridge and Belconnen. We have also doubled the amount of money that is going to every single council across this country—doubled that money for local roads in our regions as well. Every single council now under a Labor government gets double the amount of Roads to Recovery money, something those opposite never even touched. We've had to do that because of the decades of neglect of those opposite, who never invested in regional Australia, only pork barrelled, that's what they're upset about, because those days are over. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! There's far too much noise. The minister for infrastructure can definitely cease her answer. Order! Fuel Tax Credits 63 15:12 Mr CHAFFEY 316312 Parkes My question is to the Prime Minister. The fuel tax credit scheme reduces costs to farmers, businesses and industry, which helps keep food prices lower. Will the Prime Minister rule out any change to the fuel tax credit system? 15:12 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler The only people arguing for higher taxes are those opposite, who, before the member was here, all voted for higher taxes. When it comes to the diesel tax rebate, the fact is that it's been in place for some time. We haven't changed anything there. Those opposite are the only people who have stood for higher taxes. The question is: will they do what they said they would do before the election, which is that they said they would come in here and introduce legislation for higher taxes. We've seen them come in here and introduce different private members' bills. I wonder whether the member will move such a private members' bill. Workplace Relations 64 15:13 Dr GARLAND 295588 Chisholm My question is to the Minister for Workplace Relations. What action is the Albanese Labor government taking to protect penalty and overtime rates for award-reliant workers? Why is this an urgent priority for the government and what puts these protections at risk? 15:13 Ms RISHWORTH HWA Kingston I thank the member for Chisholm not only for the question but her advocacy for working people in the eastern suburbs of Melbourne. Of course in our first term, the Albanese government delivered landmark workplace relations reforms, with one goal: to get wages moving. Now we are continuing that work by delivering on our very clear and very simple election commitment to protect penalty and overtime rates in modern awards for 2.6 million low-paid workers. Our government believes that workers deserve laws that ensure their pay does not go backwards. I've been asked why this legislation is urgent. There are cases underway right now to trade away penalty and overtime rates for some our lowest paid workers, in particular in the retail industry. The retail award sets the pay of 350,000 workers directly and another 690,000 workers indirectly. For some of these workers, if this case was to succeed, it is estimated they could stand to lose up to $10,000 through a reduction of their penalty rates and overtime rates. For some of our lowest-paid workers, this would be a huge cut to their take-home pay. Our government is taking urgent and decisive action to ensure the pay of hardworking Australians is protected. We've been very, very clear about our commitment. We've engaged in genuine consultation, right across the board, with employers, unions and—for the benefit of the shadow minister—small business as well, about our very simple proposition, which is to protect penalty rates and overtime rates. I'm asked about any potential risk to these protections, and, unfortunately, the risk is those opposite. The shadow minister was so desperate to stand in the way of protecting penalty rates that earlier today he tried to delay our penalty rates bill by referring it to a committee that doesn't even exist. I have seen a lot of creative ways— The SPEAKER 53517 The minister will hold her horses for a second and I will hear from the Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order. Mr Hawke HWO The minister is inaccurate. The committee was renamed and the Clerk's advice— The SPEAKER 53517 We're not having that. I'm going to put the Manager of Opposition Business on a warning because he knows that it's not appropriate to simply jump up and give your opinion on something. If he wants to accuse the minister of doing something or not doing something, there are other forms of the House to do that. During question time is not the time to do it. We're not going to get into this territory of people just standing up and giving their opinion. If they do that, they won't be here for any more of question time. The minister has 40 seconds to complete her answer. Ms RISHWORTH HWA I have seen many, many creative ways that those opposite have tried to cut working people's wages and conditions, but this is the first time I have seen an attempt to send it to a committee that doesn't exist. Of course, we know the shadow minister loves grandstanding, perhaps to distract from the truth, or perhaps to distract from his lack of competence. But the truth is the coalition doesn't support protecting penalty rates. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Ms RISHWORTH HWA You should've heard his second reading speech! The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Minister, I'm going to caution you as well. You can sit there for a moment while I hear this point of order. We haven't had a point of order on relevance yet. Ms Bell 282981 It's on reflections on members. I ask the minister to withdraw that comment. The SPEAKER 53517 The Leader of the House on the point of order? Mr Burke DYW We would basically be ending debate if we couldn't have discussions about somebody's competence in this place. For the opposition, I think this is one where you would need to be careful about the implications of the language that you use in questions. Mr Speaker, you made a ruling earlier today about descriptors. That's where there is a descriptor being given to someone's name, but to have a situation where you can't even have an allegation about competence would really kill debate in this chamber. The SPEAKER 53517 I'm not going to ask the minister to withdraw that, but I will ask everyone in the chamber to be respectful with their language, and, in particular when you're referring to other members, just refer to the member by their title or name. That's it. I call the minister to conclude her answer. Ms RISHWORTH HWA The Australian people voted for protecting penalty rates and we will get on with the job to do just that. Mr Albanese R36 I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper. STATEMENTS 65 STATEMENTS Personal Explanation 65 15:19 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler Mr Speaker, I seek leave to give a personal explanation. The SPEAKER 53517 Does the Prime Minister claim to be misrepresented? Mr ALBANESE R36 I do, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER 53517 You may proceed. Mr ALBANESE R36 In question time today, in a question from the member for Monash, she asserted that, on 22 July 2025, I had said Australian power bills were being permanently reduced, that those comments were untrue and that I knew they were untrue. For the benefit of the House, in the interview I did on ABC 7.30—this is word for word, in the first question I was asked—I said the following: With determination, making sure we are an ambitious government. On 1 July, before Parliament even sat, we of course increased the minimum wage and award wages. We increased Paid Parental Leave by two weeks. We introduced superannuation for the first time ever on Paid Parental Leave. We introduced the rebate, the support for energy batteries, 9200 Australian households have benefited from that already—permanently reducing in their power bills on top of the energy bill relief. The member is new, so I don't blame the member for Monash. But their tactics committee really should do better than that low-rent verballing. QUESTIONS TO THE SPEAKER 65 QUESTIONS TO THE SPEAKER House of Representatives: Protests 65 15:20 Mr HAWKE HWO Mitchell Mr Speaker, I have a question for you. Today, during question time, we had the unfortunate spectacle of several protestors interrupting proceedings in the gallery. I want to acknowledge the efficiency of security and other officers in removing those individuals. As they seriously did interrupt proceedings in the House and it was obviously very difficult to hear members and questions, including the Leader of the Opposition's question and the Prime Minister, I just want you to report, when you're able to, on the strengthening of the security protocols that you undertook on 4 July 2024 and any other measures that might be required on efficacy, and, of course, if anyone did indeed in this House sign in the individuals responsible for the protesting, whether there'll be any penalties or other action taken against people who have disrupted parliament. 15:21 The SPEAKER 53517 I thank the Manager of Opposition Business for the question. A number of members have raised similar concerns to me. The normal procedures and processes will be followed, which will be a report given to me by the Serjeant-at-Arms regarding the incident, and I will report back to the— Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! I'm responding to the question made by the manager. I thought you might be interested in that. I will report back to the manager with the relevant information, including all appropriate actions that I can take regarding the matter. DOCUMENTS 65 DOCUMENTS Presentation 65 15:22 Mr BURKE DYW Watson This document is tabled in accordance with the list circulated to honourable members earlier today. Full details of the document will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings. MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE 65 MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE Housing 65 15:22 The SPEAKER 53517 I've received a letter from the honourable member for Bradfield proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely: The need for new and creative solutions to address the housing crisis. 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— 15:22 Ms BOELE 26417 Bradfield Shelter is a human right, yet in Australia we have as many homeless people as there are voters in the electorate of Bradfield, more than 122,000, and it's trending in the wrong direction. This government says that it understands what's needed—increase supply, inject more money into social and affordable housing, fix property related tax settings and improve vocational training and skills to ensure that we have the workers to build the homes. Those are good initiatives, but house prices keep rising, supply does not meet demand, dreams of homeownership grow ever more distant for new entrants and homelessness grows. When it comes to supply, state, territory and local governments need to regulate for a larger proportion of what's built to be affordable, and, through the National Housing Accord, the federal government has not just the power but also the responsibility to make it so. The Commonwealth provides state, territory and local governments with $3.5 billion in payments to support the delivery of new homes towards its 1.2 million new-homes target. The Albanese government needs to flex its muscle in the equation. The Housing Australia Future Fund is a commendable initiative to support social and affordable housing, but it must be bigger. The $500 million it disburses in grants annually in the context of the Australian property market is not going to scratch the surface of this crisis. We need to find new ways to provide affordable shelter for everyone who wants or needs it. When working with superannuation funds during my time in finance, I learned from a number of creative approaches to financing affordable housing. These examples come from the United States of America, the UK and the Netherlands. I'm also pleased to report that we have a few examples of creative solutions right here in Australia. Assemble, a housing developer and manager, majority owned by two of Australia's largest superannuation funds, HESTA and AustralianSuper, aims to originate, deliver and manage well-designed and appropriate homes for renters and homebuyers nationally, making more housing available where it is needed. Assemble provides investment opportunities which will generate stable, long-term returns by investing in housing at scale. After all, what better investment is there than property in Australia? So what does it look like? Their novel approach to the purchase pathway is known as 'build to rent to own'. Here, the rent and purchase price of the home is fixed for five years, enabling residents to live in those homes while they're saving to buy them without the housing market racing away from them. There's no obligation to buy, but the purchase price is fixed for five years if they choose to do. Assemble has completed three such projects in Melbourne, with more under construction. The projects receive funding from the Housing Australia Future Fund. They're delivered in partnership with social and community housing providers. They create supply on the doorstep of critical public transport links and near major hospitals and schools. I want to be clear about one thing. I'm not advocating and will never advocate for people's individual super savings being raided. Our superannuation is world class and it should be used solely for the purpose for which it was created—to ensure that people have a dignified retirement. Rather, I'm suggesting that the $5 trillion in Australia's institutionally managed super funds, funds which are invested on behalf of their members, be available for investment in creative solutions to our complex problems while still making strong risk-adjusted returns for members. Projects like Assemble's build-to-rent-to-buy development are a win-win-win-win. They're a win for institutional super funds, which means a win for their members, a win for those struggling to get into safe and secure housing, a win for communities that desperately need front-line workers—teachers, nurses and paramedics—and a win more broadly for a society struggling to ease demand on a choked-up housing system. So why doesn't it happen more often? Why isn't this the default style of funding for people on smallish wages in all parts of our country? These are the kinds of innovative and creative solutions that we desperately need to address our housing crisis. I will be exploring and advocating for these types of solutions and others during my time in this place. There are so many ways that we can fix this problem if we have the energy and the courage for new avenues. 15:27 Mr BURNS 278522 Macnamara I thank the member for Bradfield for bringing forward this matter of public importance and for her contribution today. I want to personally congratulate the member for Bradfield on her election to this place and thank her for her thoughtful contribution and for bringing this motion. There probably isn't a more important or difficult problem that we all collectively need to solve as a parliament and government than our housing sector and homes for Australians. Every single Australian deserves a safe and secure home to live in. Every single Australian deserves a place that they can call home, a place that they know they can return to at the end of the day where they will be free from violence or the threat of eviction and where they can be themselves and decompress and have the foundations of their life. That is something that we have sought to assist Australians with and to improve, but, as the member for Bradfield quite rightly points out, there is a lot more work to be done. I know that across my community in Macnamara, where we have a beautiful combination of people who are fortunate enough to own their own home, people who are paying off a mortgage and the almost 50 per cent of my electorate who are renting as well as a huge, amazing and beautiful community of people who live in social housing, every single home matters and every single person deserves their own home. But the truth is, as the member for Bradfield rightly points out, there are not enough homes being built and there are not enough homes catering for the different parts of the country that require different types of housing. I would say to all members in this place that the approach that the member for Bradfield has outlined in this matter of public importance is the right one. It's one where we come to this chamber, into this place, and put forward ideas around the need to find new ways and creative ways to build homes and also to invest in the ways that we know work. The Housing Australia Future Fund is working. It is an amazing program with an annual expenditure of around $500 million, which is almost fully allocated. There will be another round in the not-too-distant future that will allocate the majority of the Housing Australia Future Fund. That fund goes to supporting community housing organisations and housing providers in the construction of new homes. The fund is responsible for the construction and development of thousands of homes around the country, and it is done on a basis where there are monthly grants or availability payments made to organisations. Now, why do I make this point? The whole model behind the Housing Australia Future Fund is not just to provide low-interest loans to help cover the cost of construction; it's to help organisations pay off those loans over a period of time. Most of the contracts are done over a 25-year period. So, for the next 25 years, community housing providers are going to get a payment to help pay off their build and the housing that they built under the HAFF. The policy the coalition proposed at the previous election would have meant that those payments would be cut off at the election. It is still the policy of the coalition and the opposition to scrap the Housing Australia Future Fund. Make no mistake: the consequence of that would mean every single program funded under the HAFF would have their funding cut and contracts broken. It would leave thousands of homes without funding. It would leave organisations and community housing organisations completely bankrupt. It would mean that, across the country, thousands and thousands of people—families, and women and children fleeing domestic violence—would have the funding that helps support their housing completely cut off. It is so serious that those opposite need to take this moment to reflect on their policy position on the Housing Australia Future Fund. This is a policy that needs to be embedded into this parliament and into governing in Australia. For the next 25 years, for all of the contracts under the Housing Australia Future Fund, it is essential that this parliament—across both sides of the chamber, no matter who is in government—supports this program. The member for Bradfield makes an extremely valid point—that we need to constantly look at ways to expand it. Absolutely. But I would say to each and every member in this chamber that we need to also protect the policies out there supporting Australians who are living in social housing. For the coalition to have a policy to scrap the HAFF is not only dangerous, it is cruel and it would put thousands of Australians on the streets as well as make organisations who are doing incredible work default on their ability to manage their finances. I would urge them, in the interests of those people, to take this moment, consider their position and turn it around. If the last election taught us anything, it's that Australians know how serious this challenge is and they want builders, not blockers. Australians know that, in terms of housing, we need to be builders, not blockers. If you want to know the best evidence of that, the people who tried to block housing policy in this place are no longer here. We now have two fantastic members for Deakin and Griffith in this place replacing the two blockers from the last parliament—two people who were the housing spokespeople for the Liberal Party and the Greens who, together with their numbers in the Senate, held up the Housing Australia Future Fund and held every single piece of housing policy that we had including the build-to-rent program and the tax breaks that they are now trying to scrap via a resolution in the Senate. They were, at every turn, blockers, not builders. We need to take a different approach. Every single home matters. It's easy for people in this chamber to stop the construction of houses. It makes a big difference to those who get the keys. It makes a big difference to the people that the member for Bradfield is talking about as to why we need to be in here building as many homes as possible. It's why we have set up policies that are going to be there supporting organisations for not just this year but decades to come. It's why we need to continuously be asking ourselves what we can do to help build more. When it comes to first-home buyers, I remember speaking to thousands of people across my electorate. In the election campaign, people were coming up, and you ask that question: 'What matters to you? What do you care about?' Many hundreds of people came back to me and said, 'We'd love to be able to buy our first home.' That's why we are committed to building 100,000 homes across the country that will only be available for first-home buyers, and they won't be competing with investors or developers. When you look at renters across the country, people who are in that period in their life where renting is what they want to do, we want to make sure that those tenures are secure. We want to make sure that renting is available and it's affordable for people, and that's why we're giving tax breaks to the construction of 80,000 rental properties to ensure that there are more options across the country for people who are renting. When you think about social housing and people who require social housing and when you combine policies like the Housing Australia Future Fund, the NIF or many of the other things that Housing Australia is managing, they are the houses, the homes and the refuges that Australians rely on. They are the homes that are relied on by people who are looking to this place and looking to their government to ensure that they have a safe place. That is why we have that policy. You look at all of the different things that we are doing to try and help first-home buyers and people who are renting to have a better deal and to make sure that there aren't no-fault evictions. It's to make sure that people who, for whatever period in their life, need a safe place to go to—their home isn't safe or for whatever reason—have one. Often, through no fault of their own, they've come into circumstances where they require a home. This government and our parliament need to be there for them. We need to come to this place with the attitude of how we can do more, how we can invest in more and how we can be the people who are building homes for the future. I congratulate the member for Bradfield for coming to this place and putting forward positive suggestions. It's absolutely what we should all be doing. I look forward to working with her and anyone else in this parliament—especially our outstanding minister, who cares deeply about ensuring that every Australian has a safe place to go home to. But make no mistake. Ultimately every single home matters. Our homes matter, our constituents' homes matter, and the homes of people who have situations in their life that might change in an instant through no fault of their own really matter. It's our job to be builders not blockers. Builders not blockers—that should be the philosophy and the guiding principle of this place, and I would say to anyone who is considering being a blocker, as there were a few blockheads in the previous parliament, 'Now is the time to put away that sort of attitude and get onboard,' because every single home matters. Every single Australian deserves a safe and secure place to call home, and every single Australian deserves to feel safe at the end of the day. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 I'm going to ask people to be mindful on any reflections of members, both current and former. 15:38 Ms CHANEY 300006 Curtin It has taken 25 years of short-sighted policy from both major parties to create our current housing crisis. Housing is now half as affordable as it was when compared to wages. Young people despair at ever being able to afford a house. Renters can't save enough to break into the market, and the gap between those who own a home and those who can't get a foot in the door keeps widening. In my electorate, like the rest of Australia, access to housing is one of the top concerns I hear. People I speak to in Curtin want to see politicians working together across all levels of government so that all Australians have somewhere appropriate to live and can aspire to homeownership like generations before them. During my first term my community did some work on housing. There were 180 Curtin constituents who attended our two housing forums. Hundreds more contributed to our electorate-wide housing survey, and the resulting solutions are articulated in our Curtin housing report. What I found from this process is that my community is willing to work through difficult discussions and is open to change. We know there is no single solution, no silver bullet. We need all the options on the table, and we need to be willing to pull every lever. One topic that's been avoided because it's seen as being politically unpalatable is reviewing capital gains tax and negative gearing—the generous tax concessions that are given to investors that potentially distort and fuel the housing market and put young people on the back foot. But, in our Curtin housing survey, three-quarters of respondents said these concessions need to be reformed. Negative gearing has been described by the Grattan Institute as a 'tax shelter on wages', as investors can deduct losses from wages—and do so immediately—rather than just deducting from other investment incomes. The result is that reducing taxes on wages by investing in property is a primary goal for many investors. This tax treatment is more generous than most comparable countries that impose limits on deductibility against wages and salaries. It's the combination of these tax concessions for capital gains and negative gearing write-offs that provides many investors with a sizable tax advantage. These concessions come at a significant cost to the budget and distort the housing market by reducing homeownership and creating advantages for investors over homebuyers. As part of the government's commitment to making housing more affordable, we need to explore how we might reform CGT and negative gearing for housing. We need to create a more level playing field. There are many options for reform that are not necessarily political suicide. On capital gains tax, we could reduce the rate of the capital gains tax concession. We could apply the concessions only to new builds, or just apartments. We could limit the CGT concession to one property. On negative gearing: we could remove negative gearing from second, or third, or fourth investment properties. We could make it so that rental property losses can only be offset against rental income, not against wages, salaries or other non-investment income. For both, we could grandfather these concessions or reduce them gradually over time. In each of these options, there's a sliding scale in timing, percentage and application. Any reform in this area will boost budget revenue and this money could go to assist other parts of the housing puzzle, especially housing supply issues. Instead of being spent on tax concessions that are not addressing the housing problem, these funds could be spent on attracting more workers to the housing and construction sector or boosting investment in social and affordable housing. As well as public appetite, reform in this area has a huge amount of expert support, including at the tax reform forum convened by my colleague the member for Wentworth last week. To be clear, this is not a silver bullet. Modelling by Deloitte Australia and the Grattan Institute show that it could reduce house prices by two to five per cent in the long run and increase rents by 0.5 per cent in the short run. It could shift between 2.5 per cent and 4.7 per cent of Australians from renting to owning. That may not sound like a huge shift, but it's a life-changing shift if you live in one of Curtin's 20,000 rental households, many of whom would love to buy, but can't get into the market. For those renters, it's deeply disheartening to go to another auction and watch what you had hoped would be your home being bought by an investor looking for a return. We owe it to future generations of aspiring homeowners to take a level-headed, open-minded approach to reform in this area. I urge the government to consider a range of reform options for capital gains tax concessions and negative gearing as part of the work that will come out of the economic reform roundtable. 15:43 Ms BRISKEY 263427 Maribyrnong I'm really pleased to have the opportunity to rise in support of the direction our government is taking to tackle this housing crisis. The opportunity to lay down roots and have a place to call home is so incredibly important to me, the community I represent and to this government. After nearly a decade of neglect under the former coalition government, where housing affordability worsened, social housing stock declined and renters were forgotten, Labor is delivering the most significant investment in housing in a generation. I'm so incredibly proud to be a member of this government and to be able to contribute to this incredible investment. After those years of neglect, Labor came into this place and got to work. We created the $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund and developed 30,000 new social and affordable homes—housing for people experiencing homelessness, women and children escaping violence, frontline workers and older Australians at risk of housing stress. This is despite the fact that we had the coalition and the Greens teaming up to block the Housing Australia Future Fund, but we got on with it. We pursued it, and I do appreciate the member for Macnamara's colloquial term of 'being a team of builders, not blockers'. Across Australia, our government is working hard to improve access to housing right across the board, because this issue is not localised to one area or one section of the population. We are supporting state and local governments to build social and affordable homes, so nurses and teachers can live in the communities they work in and not have to travel hours to support the people they care for. We're helping renters by improving supply through investing in build-to-rent properties and consecutively increasing Commonwealth Rent Assistance. We're helping first-home buyers to get a leg-up and be supported into their first home through our Home Guarantee Scheme, supporting them with five per cent of the deposit. And we're delivering $54 million to manufacture homes more quickly. During the campaign, in my own electorate of Maribyrnong, I was joined by the powerhouse of our housing policy, the Minister for Housing, Clare O'Neil. We visited one of the Housing Australia Future Fund's projects, in Kensington. We saw the real-world impact our strategy is having, and it was exciting to watch the project go from strength to strength, delivering more homes in my area close to where people live and close to transport. Those who are familiar with my electorate will know we are proud to have social and community homes right across the area, which ensures that people from all backgrounds have access to good schools, infrastructure and community support. And our policies have strengthened that commitment. In Maribyrnong, since we came to power in 2022, our policies have supported 700 locals to purchase their first home, with 280 locals given opportunities to go into new social and community housing and over 5,000 residents receiving increased Commonwealth Rent Assistance. And we are delivering 1,950 new homes through our build-to-rent program. I also want to take this opportunity to call out the investment in innovation, particularly prefab and modular homes, because Modscape in my electorate, at Essendon Fields, is at the forefront of that innovation, delivering faster construction of needed homes. I got to witness that in action and saw how it was working together—how fast construction is in building social and affordable homes that are being sent up to north Queensland. Labor is acting where the coalition failed and where the Greens played political games, because we believe that housing is a right, not a privilege. Everyone deserves a roof over their head, a place to call home and a stake in our country's future. 15:47 Mr GEE 261393 Calare I commend the member for Bradfield for bringing this matter of public importance to this House today, and I congratulate her on her election to our parliament. It's no surprise to anyone that Australia is in the grip of a housing crisis. Every day Australians are suffering from housing stress, be it through mortgage repayments, rental affordability, or risk or experience of homelessness. While successive governments have introduced initiatives to try to ease this crisis, it's clear that much more work and many more initiatives are needed, especially when it comes to providing housing to our most vulnerable. The housing crisis in regional New South Wales, including across our electorate of Calare, is worsening and demands urgent solutions. The chief executive officer of community housing provider Housing Plus is Justin Cantelo. On behalf of the Western New South Wales District for Housing and Homelessness group, he contacted me recently to outline the extent of the crisis. He points out that 38 per cent of the state's population is now living in regional New South Wales and that internal migration to the regions is continuing to rise. Rents in regional New South Wales have increased by 70 per cent over the past decade, far outpacing Sydney's 48.5 per cent rise, while rental vacancy rates have fallen to just 1.2 per cent. Rental stress now affects over 38 per cent of households in the regions, which is above the state average. Mr Cantelo also points out that social housing waitlists continue to grow, with nearly 26,000 vulnerable households across regional New South Wales seeking secure housing. Rates of homelessness, particularly amongst Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, are significantly higher in regional areas, with western New South Wales recording the highest rates in the state. Across our electorate, locations such as Orange, Bathurst, Lithgow and the midwestern area report youth homelessness rates above the state average. The central west also continues to experience elevated rates of domestic violence related assaults, further compounding the crisis. The Homes New South Wales 2024 Street Count revealed a 25.5 per cent increase from the previous year in the number of people sleeping rough across New South Wales, with regional areas experiencing the most significant surge. The social housing waitlist continues to grow in regional New South Wales, with 25,897 vulnerable households of the total 65,758, or 39 per cent, across New South Wales seeking housing. Despite these clear indicators, the Western New South Wales District for Housing and Homelessness group states that regional NSW has been overlooked in critical national housing funding. In the first funding round of the Housing Australia Future Fund, only eight per cent of homes for New South Wales—that's 257 out of 3,265—were allocated to regional New South Wales. In the second round, just one regional project was included. To be clear, the Housing Australia Future Fund is currently failing country New South Wales. While the recent update to the Housing Australia investment mandate includes language on equitable funding, it still lacks clarity and enforceable regional targets. It's sad to say it, but, on its track record so far, the Housing Australia Future Fund is in danger of being renamed and known as the 'Housing Australia Future Fund for City People'. Without a dedicated and measurable commitment to regional, rural and remote communities, areas like Calare will continue to miss out, and the crisis will worsen. If we're serious about tackling the housing crisis, we must look to innovation and industry for real and effective solutions. Regional Australia, including Calare, is leading the way. In March this year, I had the privilege of attending the opening of the newly transformed Lithgow TAFE building. It had been left dormant for years but was transformed to 17 specialist disability accommodation apartments to provide affordable and appropriate housing to those most in need. The results have been impressive and stunning. Another example of an enterprise that offers solutions to ease the crisis is Green Timber Technology in Orange. It is a new prefabricated housing venture that will utilise local timber, advanced robotics and off-site construction methods to deliver architecturally designed affordable homes at scale, with the capacity to produce one every four hours, once fully operational. It's an example of regional Australia leading the way. I once again commend the member for Bradfield for bringing this important issue to the House this afternoon. 15:52 Ms AMBIHAIPAHAR 315618 Barton I also want to thank the member for Bradfield for her contribution today. I rise to speak with purpose on an issue that is personally important to me and, I believe, is very urgent and deeply felt in the electorate of Barton and far beyond, and that is the housing crisis. For me, this isn't just a policy; it's quite personal. Before coming here, I worked at St Vincent De Paul Society New South Wales. I worked with a large team, and I looked after a large geographical area of New South Wales, which covers the electorate of the member for Bradfield as well. We saw a lot of the issues of the housing crisis in the eyes of a lot of women, in particular, who were looking for a safe place to be and to put their head down to sleep. I was seeing faces of, particularly, pensioners who were having to skip meals to keep a roof over their head and sitting with families facing eviction, women fleeing violence and people forced to sleep in their cars. That is something I also saw in my role as a councillor at Georges River Council. People, particularly women, are sleeping in their cars in my own electorate, which is a big issue. When you do that work and when you are seeing those people and hearing their stories, you learn something very quickly. Housing insecurity doesn't just take away shelter; it strips away dignity. It chips away at health, particularly mental health, and it erodes hope. That's why I'm very proud to be part of a government that is not just acknowledging this crisis but also confronting it. Under the Albanese Labor government, we are delivering the largest investment in social and affordable housing in more than a decade, and we're doing it shoulder-to-shoulder with state, territory and local governments because solving this crisis requires all hands on deck. I particularly want to acknowledge the Minister for Housing, Homelessness and Cities for her tireless leadership and for also visiting Arncliffe, in my electorate, to see first hand one of our major housing projects. That development is not just about the building itself; it's also about creating a community and a sense of belonging. It's also about showing what's possible when every level of government works together with one shared belief that housing is not a privilege; it is absolutely a right. We are delivering in Barton. Over 800 locals have been supported into homeownership through Labor's expanded Home Guarantee Scheme, because a five per cent deposit should not be a barrier to owning a home. Over 200 construction workers are being trained locally because building homes also builds opportunities. Nearly 400 new social and affordable homes are underway in Arncliffe thanks to the Housing Australia Future Fund. An additional 17 social homes have been delivered in Bayside and Georges River, two LGAs in my electorate, through the Social Housing Accelerator, and more than 7,000 Barton residents are benefitting from the back-to-back increases in Commonwealth rental assistance. Labor's response is bold and comprehensive, and it is absolutely grounded in value. We're tackling the crisis with a $43 billion plan to make it easier to buy and better to rent and build more homes. In the ambit of building, we're starting the largest housing build in Australian history: 1.2 million new homes across the country; 55,000 social and affordable rentals; 100,000 homes reserved for first home buyers, not property investors; and 28,000 social and affordable homes in planning and construction. We've also committed $54 million to accelerate housing supply through innovative construction methods like prefabricated and modular homes because it shouldn't take longer to approve a home than to build it. We're streamlining processes, we're strengthening supply chains and we're creating local jobs while we do it. In Barton, the pressure is relentless. The cost of living is an absolute issue. Rents are climbing, and our social housing waitlists are growing. That's why the work we are doing right now, like the development project in Arncliffe with the New South Wales Labor government, is not just helpful but essential. Housing is not an economic issue at all; it's absolutely a human one. 15:56 Dr HAINES 282335 Indi I thank the member for Bradfield for this excellent MPI and for the way we're engaging in this House on an issue that matters to every Australian, because housing remains unaffordable for most Australians. During the election, housing stress was a constant theme in towns across my electorate of Indi. House prices are higher than ever, and rents have grown by more than 10 per cent in the past year. Too many people tell me it's a fool's errand to find an affordable home or a secure rental in regional Victoria, and they're right. This government has made big promises on housing, and, as the Independent member for Indi, I'll be holding the government accountable on these promises. I hope to continue working with them in good faith and a collaborative spirit to ensure housing investment benefits regional areas such as those in my electorate. I note the words from the member for Calare, who shares these concerns and this aspiration. This is because without a strong regional lens the government's housing plans will fail to benefit our growing regions. When the bills establishing the $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund and the Housing Supply and Affordability Council were passed in the previous parliament, I was proud to secure amendments ensuring that regional views were front and centre. But I was disappointed that the government failed to back me in my amendments that would have guaranteed a clear line of sight on funding. This concern is something, again, I know I share with the member for Calare. The regions represent 30 per cent of the population, so we should receive at least 30 per cent of housing funding, and I will continue to prosecute the case for this. In addition to a fair share of overall funding, we also need to ensure that Commonwealth investment is going to the critical enabling infrastructure that unlocks new homes—the pipes, the pavements, the poles, the wires. It's one of the top issues raised by local governments and developers in my electorate. That's why I welcomed the government's adoption of my idea for a regional housing infrastructure fund that would do just that. That was rebranded by the government as the Housing Support Program. However, it's unclear whether the government intends to commit more funds to this program, which at present is $500 million, and, frankly, it's too small to make a significant difference. So I continue to call for the government to go further and commit $2 billion, which, according to the Parliamentary Budget Office, would unlock tens of thousands of much-needed homes in our regional towns and cities. Like the member for Bradfield, I also recognise there are other creative and innovative solutions we must explore. With the housing crisis not seemingly getting any better, we must put all ideas on the table. We must investigate how to get more builders and tradies to build more homes, and we must work with the states and territories to create opportunities for homes that go beyond the straight-up, traditional quarter-acre block. For example, the New South Wales government recently released its NSW Housing Pattern Book. From only $1, aspiring home builders can access architectural designs for terraces and townhouses. The New South Wales government is also introducing a new 10-day approval process. This fast-track pathway will facilitate approval and the start of construction within weeks of an application being made, processes which, as we know, can often take years. These ideas demonstrate an innovative approach to getting more of the medium-density housing our cities and regional centres require. I'll be watching progress on this closely and hoping that we can replicate some of these ideas if they work. Prefab and modular homes have, for too long, been looked down on as a cheap and second-rate form of housing, but, today, they're an affordable option for sustainable energy-efficient, quality and beautiful housing. I recognise that the government are working in this space and have committed $50 million to modernising the modular housing industry. I look forward to understanding the outcome of this work and how it will improve access to affordable, modular and prefab housing in places across my electorate of Indi. Solving the housing crisis will take commitment by all levels of government—not over one year or one election cycle but over many years and many election cycles. This government has made a good start through its investment in new social and affordable housing, critical enabling infrastructure and planning reform at the state and local level. But we need to resolutely keep going, and Australians expect results in the next three years. I'll be expecting results in the next three years too. 16:01 Ms WITTY 316660 Melbourne Thank you to the member for Bradfield for bringing up this topic. Today I rise to speak for the thousands of people across Melbourne who are living through this country's housing crisis. Labor is delivering creative solutions to the crisis. Housing is the foundation of a good life. It's where we build our families, our future and our sense of safety. But, right now, that foundation is cracking badly for too many people. Whether it's a young couple trying to buy their first home, a single parent absorbing yet another rent hike or an older Australian wondering how long they can hold on, this crisis is real and urgent. Melbourne is a city of renters, of students, of workers, of migrants and of families just trying to get ahead. Housing is not just an economic issue. It's also a social issue, a human rights issue and a generational issue. In my first months as the member for Melbourne, I've heard the stories directly of people saving for years only to be locked out of the community they grew up in; of older renters skipping meals or medicines to pay the rent; and of families with two incomes, often working in essential jobs, turning to housing services for help for the very first time. These are the stories I carry with me into this place, and I will not stop speaking up until everyone in Melbourne has access to a safe, secure and affordable home. That's why I am proud to be part of a Labor government that is not tinkering at the edges but rebuilding the foundation. At the heart of our housing agenda is a simple truth: the best way to solve a housing crisis is to build more housing. We are delivering the most ambitious national housing agenda in generations, with 1.2 million new well-located homes by the end of the decade and a $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund delivering 30,000 new social and affordable houses in the first five years. Of these homes, 4,000 will go to women and children fleeing domestic violence, which is the No. 1 reason for women to become homeless, and older women at the risk of homelessness, the fastest growing cohort of homelessness. In Melbourne, the work is already underway. Through Labor's expanded Home Guarantee Scheme, we've helped more than 700 local residents buy their first home with just a five per cent deposit. More than 200 local trades apprentices are now in training, backed by increased incentive payments. We have boosted Commonwealth rent assistance twice, and that support now goes to more than 8,000 people across Melbourne. We are working with the state government through the social housing accelerator, delivering hundreds of new social homes right here in Melbourne, and we're doing it smart, through Labor's build-to-rent program, which those opposite are trying to demolish. We're building over 11,000 new homes in Melbourne, with long-term leases and fairer rents. This is what it means to govern with Labor values. We don't just leave it to the market. We show up, we invest and we plan—not just for the headlines but for the next generation. And, yes, we are backing renters too. We are funding stronger rental laws to end unfair evictions and give renters real bargaining power. We are delivering cost-of-living relief, cheaper medicines, energy bill help and record Medicare investments because, when rent goes up, every little bit counts. Housing is not a luxury; it's a human right. In Melbourne we are fighting for a future where no-one is priced out of their own community, where our kids don't have to move hours away just to find a home and where our nurses, our teachers and our aged-care workers can live near the people they care for. That's the future I am fighting for. That's why before coming into this place I was working with an organisation called Homes for Homes, where I helped to raise a pipeline of $110 million to help end homelessness. I worked with organisations like Assemble, build-to-rent-to-buy schemes, and made sure that people, through the sale of their home, can help to raise money to end homelessness. So let's keep building; let's keep backing people in. 16:06 Mr KATTER HX4 Kennedy I had the great honour of being the state minister for community services, and that gave me the community areas in Queensland, the First Australians areas—my brother-cousins out there—and we had about $25 million a year for housing. I'd like to put on the record the names of the people that I put in to run the department. Eric Law and the late Lester Rosendale, a cousin of Noel Pearson's, were put in charge of the department. In their wisdom they decided that all houses would be built exclusively by blackfella labour—no outsider whitefellas at all. I thought that they'd gone a bit far and I wasn't particularly happy about the decision, particularly since I wasn't consulted about it, but it turned out to be a roaring success. The labour costs were cut almost in half because they were getting the dole money, and we topped it up to award wages. We had enough money to build about 200 houses, and we ended up building 900 houses. They were concrete-block constructions. Donnie Fraser at Doomadgee decided that we should have our own block-making machines, so two factories were set up. They cost us $100,000 each. We produced our own concrete blocks, and they had to meet besser specifications—so blocks exactly the same as besser blocks. That enabled us to build the best part of a thousand houses over a period of about four or five years. Now (a) there's really no money for Aboriginal housing at all; (b) there's no provision for First Australians to build their own houses; and (c) they can't get any land because they've got to go through a process run by whitefellas in Brisbane, and we all know what that means when you're trying to get hold of some land. I could go on. But let me say this. A cavity-block-construction home is so simple. You just stack the blocks and you pour concrete down the cavity. Anyone can do that. You can buy a window frame that goes from the ceiling to the floor off the prison in Mareeba; they make them for about $300 a panel, which is very, very cheap. There you go. There's your wall; there are your windows. If you have curved, galvanised iron—ripple iron, as we had in the old days—so long as your house is not more than seven or maybe eight metres wide, you don't need any timber underneath—no supports. It is tremendously strong, and I'm talking about heavy galvanised iron which is used in culverts. The cost of building a house should be negligible. Let me take my own home town of Charters Towers as an example. My wife and I bought 20 acres, and we couldn't afford to complete our little Logan unit, which cost $23,000—in terms of today's money, it was about 60 grand—so she had to go down and subdivide. It took her 25 minutes to fill out a form. She had to give the clerk of the mining warden's court 25 bucks, and she said, 'When can I sell it?' The clerk said, 'Right now; go up to the real estate agent.' So she went down to the real estate agent, and two days later we sold the block and were able to complete our house. That process now takes two years and costs $75,000. How can you possibly countenance this level of incompetence? The only reason that we haven't got houses in Australia is that no-one can get around to doing these subdivisions and get through the barbed-wire entanglements of red tape that lie there. I think everyone in this House knows that, but you don't do anything about it. What we are proposing is abolishing— (Time expired) 16:11 Ms JARRETT 298574 Brisbane I rise to speak to this motion because housing is a human right and we do need to work collectively to address the challenges we face in this area. I thank the member for Bradfield for her contribution. Everyone should have a safe place they call home. When I was a child my family provided just that to a number of foster siblings, so I saw very early on how this can change someone's life forever. As the minister said earlier today, the challenges we face in housing have been a long time in the making and they are complex. This Labor government recognises that. This is why we have made the single biggest investment in housing since World War II. Our $43 billion plan sees investment across homelessness, social housing, homeownership support for low- and middle-income earners and additional rent assistance. Homelessness is growing across the country, and data shows that middle-aged women are the fastest-growing cohort. In recognition of the need to address this challenge, the Prime Minister appointed the member for Macnamara as the Special Envoy for Social Housing and Homelessness. Labor is also working to deliver 55,000 social and affordable homes. We're investing $1 billion into crisis and transitional housing through the NHIF and $275 million through safe places, emergency accommodation, and crisis and transitional accommodation—that's a mouthful—programs for women and children escaping domestic violence. Labor is providing $93 billion to the states and territories through the National Agreement on Social Housing and Homelessness, and this includes $400 million per year in dedicated homelessness funding that states must match. This is all about providing vulnerable people with a safe home—people like Karen, a Brisbane local in her 60s who I met during the campaign. After fleeing domestic violence for seven years she finally got her own home. She can decorate it as hers, she can leave the dishes to tomorrow if she wants to and she can use the washing machine without checking first. She can live her life her way. I am also very proud of what this government is doing to help realise the Australian dream of owning a home. We are investing $10 billion to build up to 100,000 homes reserved only for first home buyers, with no competition from property investors. This funding will support enabling infrastructure, land purchases and construction to get these homes built near work and family, and only for first home buyers. From 2026, we will further expand the Home Guarantee Scheme—the five per cent deposit scheme—so that will be open to every Australian looking to buy their own home. Already, over 1,500 in our local Brisbane community have a home under this program. Lastly, Labor's Help to Buy equity scheme, which opens up further later this year, means the Commonwealth government will pitch in up to 40 per cent of the upfront cost of your home, which means a smaller mortgage for first home buyers. Labor's housing investments are making a real difference to people across the country and the people of my electorate. About 9,000 Brisbane locals receive Commonwealth Rent Assistance, 80 homes are currently being delivered under the Housing Australia financing programs, and almost 3,000 dwellings have been built under the build-to-rent program, which the opposition are trying to demolish. We can't forget that those opposite sat on their hands for almost 10 years without even a housing minister for most of that time. It's always left to Labor to come in and clean up their messes. Disappointingly, in the last parliament, we also saw the blocking of the Housing Australia Future Fund, and, frustratingly, there have also been local protests against sensible development. This can't continue. We have to be better than this. Whether it's a woman fleeing a situation of domestic or family violence, a veteran looking for their own place, a young family looking to get into the market or a frontline worker priced out of the community, getting a home will change their life. Having a safe home gives people long-term security and stability and a sense of belonging. Their own home will enable them to set down their roots and create long-lasting memories. Labor is working to deliver more homes of every type because more homes mean more affordable housing. That's why I'm proud to be standing here. I'm proud to be Labor; this is what Labor governments do. 16:17 Ms LE 295676 Fowler I'd also like to thank the member for Bradfield for bringing this matter of public importance to the House. I would also like to congratulate her on her election to represent her community here in the 48th Parliament. Since my election in May 2022, I have spoken in this House many times about the housing crisis and the devastating impact it's having on communities like mine in Fowler, where incomes are low and populations continue to grow—and, of course, so too do our culturally diverse community's needs. Like the member for Curtin, I, too, in my first term, organised a housing forum, where I brought together local, state and federal bodies to look at how we can address this housing issue, look at the mechanisms in place—or not in place—and try to bring people together to work together. I think that sometimes the solution is right there in front of our face, but we're not looking at it, and we are spending so much time in the Canberra bubble, creating policies that are, at times, more of a barrier and a hindrance, rather than unblocking the housing crisis. I brought community housing together with organisations like the Gandangara Local Aboriginal Land Council. From my understanding, their CEO, Melissa Williams, was grateful because last year the Gandangara land council, through that housing forum that I organised, managed to speak with a community housing group. I believe there is a memorandum of understanding in place, currently, whereby housing could be built for the Indigenous community in Fowler on land owned by the Gandangara land council. I'll be watching that space because it's our role here, in the federal parliament, to facilitate those community groups, those industries and those individuals and to try and make their lives easier. The Priced out report by Everybody's Home, a coalition of housing and social services groups, shows that renters earning $100,000 are now in housing stress. In Sydney, renters are paying 48 per cent of their income on rent. As I mentioned, in Fowler I hear from residents and families constantly about how they're forced to live in overcrowded homes, and seniors are also struggling, as well as renters being squeezed out. Fairfield City Council has approved land in Cecil Park and Horsley Park for more than 20,000 homes, but that means nothing without government stepping in to fund the East West Rail Link to connect Western Sydney airport to Parramatta and beyond. It's not just about trains. Without proper investment in roads, drainage, schools, hospitals and utilities, we are not building homes; we are building hardship. I understand that, at a federal level, we don't build homes, but we do set policies, and we do hold the purse strings. That means the Commonwealth must take the lead in ensuring states and local governments are supported to deliver the infrastructure that unlocks housing supply, and that must happen in coordination not confusion. We also cannot ignore the impact of migration. Migration enriches our nation, but it must be planned. If we continue increasing our population without proper planning for housing, services and infrastructure, we risk worsening inequality and weakening the social cohesion that holds this country together. The government can talk about targets, Help to Buy or housing accords, but unless we get the infrastructure and workforce right, we will continue to fall short. The national housing council has made it clear: labour shortages, rising costs of materials and low planning approvals are strangling supply. These aren't new problems, but they remain unsolved. That's why we need serious practical solutions. Let's start with coordinating funding across federal, state and local governments so infrastructure arrives before homes, not years later; workforce investments through apprenticeships, faster recognition of overseas qualifications and more pathways into trades for women and multicultural communities; smarter incentives, like targeted tax reforms to encourage timely construction, and discouraging land banking; and unlocking public land, especially near transport and services, for homes and community facilities. These are not extreme ideas. These are reasonable, achievable steps that any government serious about solving this crisis should be considering. Housing is about community, stability and fairness, and in Fowler we have the land, the talent and the will to lead housing innovation—if only governments stopped talking and started building. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 The time for this discussion has now concluded. BILLS 75 BILLS Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 75

Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025

Report from Federation Chamber 75 Third Reading 75 16:22 Mr RAE 300122 Hawke by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Aged Care (Accommodation Payment Security) Levy Amendment Bill 2025 75

Aged Care (Accommodation Payment Security) Levy Amendment Bill 2025

Report from Federation Chamber 75 Third Reading 75 16:23 Mr RAE 300122 Hawke by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. GOVERNOR-GENERAL'S SPEECH 75 GOVERNOR-GENERAL'S SPEECH Address-in-Reply 75 16:24 The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Before I give the call to the member for Parkes, I remind the House that this is the honourable member's first speech. I ask the House to extend to him all of the usual courtesies. 16:24 Mr CHAFFEY 316312 Parkes I stand here today as the member for Parkes, ready to serve. I am here to serve the people of this vast electorate across regional New South Wales, whether they live in the silver city of Broken Hill, under the searching eye of the skies of Coonabarabran or in amongst the black opals of Lightning Ridge. I am here to serve them whether they are young families or people who have lived for decades in the remote part of New South Wales and worked the land all their life. I learnt, while I was still very young, the great difference that service with courage, patience and loyalty can make to a life. My parents divorced when my two sisters and I were very young. After some time, my mother began a new relationship with my now stepfather. Taking on the responsibility of providing for an instant family is something most people would walk from. But he didn't. It is hard to say here, in this very public place, but I need to do so to show just how important my stepfather was and is in our lives. For reasons I'll never truly understand, my mother was struggling with gambling addictions and poor mental health that would often escalate into events of extreme rage and physical violence. This was never towards us as children but always towards my stepfather. Watching this man deal patiently and lovingly with these most difficult of issues remains a deep source of inspiration to me. The scourge of mental illness, gambling addiction and domestic violence is something many of us face quietly. I have never and will never condone domestic violence, and I know that every situation is different. As we changed and grew, there were good days and there were bad. My stepfather continued to work on the land to provide for his family and live the truest example of what it means to serve with courage in everyday life. He stepped up without question. He never gave up on us. As I speak today, my stepfather is my mother's full-time carer. She has advanced dementia, and he continues to be by her side, as he has for more than 50 years. This is the type of service that has guided me as a husband, as a father and in leadership. It is a philosophy that aligns with my Christian faith that through grace of God, in advance, he has prepared me to serve. In my late teens, I left home and moved to a nearby town to start my first real job. I began a management traineeship with a supermarket chain. To do this, I had to borrow money from one of my sisters to buy new clothes and get set up in the local caravan park. It was the best decision of my life. This led me to meet my wife, Judy, a young nurse. We began our life's journey together. Several years on, as we started our family, I also joined my wife's family business, manufacturing agricultural equipment for grain and cotton industries, as an apprentice boilermaker. My other true mentor was Jude's dad, Harold, who I worked under during my apprenticeship. Jude's parents, Harold and Joan, not only supported us, as family does, but they also had the faith in us to bring us into the family business. They celebrated the highest of highs with us, when times were good, and they also cried with us in those lowest of lows, when we struggled to find the money to pay pages on payday. Over time, Judy and I became the second generation businessowners of that business. I have now stepped down from the family business after 28 years, and I'm very proud to say that our children have taken over the reins. It is now a very proud third-generation Australian-owned family business. Working in small business and volunteering alongside the great people of some of my community service organisations, including the Gunnedah Rotary club and the Carroll Rural Fire Service, I became even more focused on helping my community and successfully ran for Gunnedah Shire Council in 2016, where I served for eight years as mayor. My time as mayor taught me the greatest respect for all who serve as elected members in their communities. This role also gave me the opportunity to take on senior leadership roles, such as the chairman of the New South Wales Country Mayors Association and a place on the board of Local Government New South Wales. This has left me with a greater insight into how the three tiers of government can, and should, work together to achieve better results for all Australians. I would like to acknowledge those in my local-government family that have supported my journey to parliament, some of whom are in the gallery here today; thank you. But these experiences have also made me aware of the minefield of challenges that come ahead, such as navigating different levels of government and the differing opinions and priorities in my quest to deliver for Parkes. I am committed to working very closely with all 20 councils and the Unincorporated Far West Area of the Parkes electorate. Regional New South Wales is the best place to live and to do business. But every state and federal win is a fight. Our people just get on with the job, facing bigger health, education and business challenges than most people living in metropolitan areas. I would like to tell a story of a young couple in their first years of marriage, who took the significant step of buying their first home. It was a big financial commitment, but one that they took on with their whole hearts knowing this was the beginning of their homeownership journey and their family journey. Unfortunately, the market was at its peak. The young couple were unaware that the government changes were about to gut the local timber industry. The local abattoir would soon be on its knees, as well as the local mining industry, causing a huge reduction in the town's population. Government decisions had squarely and severely impacted the economy of that town. It took ten years for the value of that first home to return to its original purchase price. That town was Gunnedah, and that young couple was my wife, Judy, and me. We have unforgettable lived experience of the personal hardship that follows disastrous decision-making by government. This experience was a driving force in my motivation to join the local chamber of commerce and to then turn my focus to local government for solutions. I was determined to do whatever I could to prevent other people from suffering the setbacks that we did at the hands of government who failed to realise the consequence of their decisions. The Parkes electorate needs young families. We need skilled and talented workers, and professionals, to make the confident choice to live in this incredible region. Economic policymaking needs to reflect the holistic approach that makes it easier for people to get a foothold and to establish their family. Location is a huge part of this. I want to make sure that the cities, the towns and the villages within the Parkes electorate are the places young Australians choose to put down their roots. Decision-makers must understand the implications of their choices. We must do all we can to prevent shocks to our communities that have the power to destabilise families, and, in some cases, lead to heartache and destruction. Many of the communities in the Parkes electorate have been faced with the challenge of population decline over the past decade. For that very reason, my wife and I struggled financially in our early married life. Growing the population throughout the electorate will be my biggest challenge during the time that I serve. My role now is to serve the people of the Parkes electorate—a huge electorate that covers half of the state of New South Wales, including vast tracks of the Queensland and South Australian borders. It's no small task. When I'm not in parliament, I'll be clocking up the miles transversing over 400,000 square kilometres. The electorate stretches from Boomi in the north to Barmedman in the south; to Cameron Corner where the New South Wales, Queensland and South Australian borders meet; and everywhere in between. That is an area bigger than Great Britain. It's bigger than Germany and bigger than Japan. In the recent election campaign, I travelled more than 36,000 kilometres. I know the tyranny of distance will be an ongoing challenge, and I'm committed to turning up to the largest and the smallest of the electorate's communities to the best of my ability. That is what is needed to serve and represent this important part of our nation. The challenges and issues this electorate faces are as varied as the shires that make them up, and I'll be there to listen and to act persistently and consistently. Businesses and industries across the Parkes electorate are shouldering more than their fair share of our country's economic heavy lifting without their fair share of funding. Our communities face endless battles, sometimes just to maintain the basic levels of services. Our small businesses are at the heart of our nation's economy. We must reward small-business owners for their commitment to the communities they serve and acknowledge the risk they take every single day. Decisions made far from the bush must include critical needs for investment in regional infrastructure. This is where Australia's food, fibre and minerals are produced and processed and where value is added. Transporting our homegrown products for domestic consumption and international trade must be both reliable and affordable. Infrastructure projects such as the nation building Inland Rail project are vital to ensure that we keep goods moving productively from capital ports, from Brisbane to Melbourne and west to Perth, with the ability to stimulate economic opportunities for regional communities in between. The Nationals first developed this plan, and it was the Nationals who aggressively commenced construction. In recent years, the handbrake has been applied. Construction on the northern corridor is now at snail's pace, and I do not intend to drop the ball on this project. I will be applying as much pressure as possible to see trains moving goods to market through Parkes and Narromine, Gilgandra, Baradine, Narrabri, Moree and North Star and on to Queensland as quickly as possible. The views on water policy held by Australia's two main political parties could not be further apart. There has been a lack of investment in water security and water storage in the Parkes electorate. In fact, over recent years there has been a concerted effort to take water away from our communities through water policy changes that now allow buybacks in the Murray-Darling Basin. How can we seriously back our farmers and regional communities unless we protect their access to water? In the state seat of Tamworth there is a great example of foresight, Chaffey Dam. It is a critical piece of infrastructure named after father-and-son visionaries Frank and Bill Chaffey, who were dedicated to deliver on water security for generations. These visionaries, both of whom at different times were members for the state seat of Tamworth and ministers for agriculture, knew the importance of planning for the future. We must continue this today. Investment from all levels of government in our regional communities on legacy infrastructure not only brings benefits of immediate economic growth but also generates confidence and has a flow-on effect moving beyond the Great Dividing Range. The Last Post Ceremony at the Australian War Memorial ahead of this first sitting of parliament was a stark reminder of how many Australians throughout history have lost their lives in the defence of this country. As a member of the 48th Parliament it is my duty to forever honour those lives and their sacrifice and to protect the lives of all Australians into the future. I acknowledge that there is no greater responsibility than to keep Australians safe. We must ensure that we have the right tools, the right people, the right equipment and the right policies and investment to ensure the sovereignty of our nation. We need a non-conditional approach towards the defence of our country. We can never be confident that conflict will not arise again. We simply must be prepared. Weighing heavily on my mind is the enormous cost that regional Australia faces at the hands of the sudden and unguided escalation of wind, solar and battery installations. Cities, towns and villages within the Central-West Renewable Energy Zone and right across Australia are facing scenarios of developers against farmers, neighbours against neighbours and family against family. The enormous scale of these installations will be a generational disaster—one that will cost our children and their children deeply. As I stand in parliament today, I'm conscious of the legacy of the giants of the National Party and the members who have represented the area that makes up the current Parkes electorate, and I pay tribute to the Hon. Mark Coulton, who held his role for more than 17 years with such dedication and motivation. I deeply appreciate the support of both Mark and Robyn, and I'm so glad that they're here today in the gallery to share this moment. In reading over past members' first speeches, I've seen similar themes, starting with the Hon. John Anderson, who first entered parliament back in 1989. Concerns about the impact of poor environmental policies on our agricultural sector, the need for targeted immigration and the critical importance of transport across large geographical areas have been front of mind for this area's federal representatives for many, many years, so too has the need for financial restructure that supports our people, attracts newcomers and gives them the desire and ability to stay within our regions. We are still talking about these same issues today. We're all facing a devastating increase in suicide in regional communities, an increase in mental health issues in our youth, incidents of youth crime in both boys and girls, and an increase in family breakdown—all very strong indicators that, unless more is done in regional communities, we won't turn the corner. As you've heard earlier in my speech, addressing domestic violence remains a matter close to my heart. Bold decisions must be made. We need to see help for regional Australians in areas such as tax reform, greater economic incentives for people who choose regional towns, better infrastructure and investment in our roads and local facilities, and equitable access to the basics such as quality education, child care, aged care and health care. These are all critical areas in which I want to see change for the Parkes communities. I want to see other people, other families, thrive on the sheer potential of our region. I began my working life as a supermarket training manager, before taking on a boilermaker apprenticeship. I entered into local government with the goal of building a strong future for my community. I see so many good people in our regions who are putting their heads down and working hard to enable their families, their employees and their communities to thrive. I want to use this role to encourage and support and to serve regional Australians. There are so many who have supported my long journey, and I want to thank my colleagues in the National Party and the leadership team, who saw fit to appoint me to the position of shadow assistant minister for agriculture and resources. I also want to thank the army of people who assisted me in the campaign trail, including all the volunteers across 116 polling booths. It's impossible to thank everyone. Many of you are here today and I want you to know just how much I appreciated your hard work and support. I want to extend my gratitude to the people of the Parkes electorate who have placed such great faith in me to represent them in this parliament. I come to this role with a deep sense of respect for the work of parliament in guarding and improving the lives and livelihoods of every Australian. I believe in the difference that can be made by implementing good policy. I want to see that reflected in the lives of people in our electorate and right across Australia. I will use my life experience to serve the people who choose to live in these communities throughout the Parkes electorate, and I will serve them with the same dedication and commitment that was taught to me by my step-father many years ago. To my church family and our wider circle of friends and family, who have loved us, prayed with us and supported us in many different ways on this journey so far, I say thank you. To our Parkes team here in the gallery today, to Miranda, Jodie, Debbie, Emma, Amy and Marie, and to Kate and Sophie, who unfortunately couldn't be here with us today: I thank you for your patience and encouragement. Your hard work and knowledge is deeply appreciated. With my final words, I thank my family—my darling wife of 32 years, Judy; our children, Jack and his partner, Madison, Molly and her husband, James, Lucy and her husband, Elliot, and Tom and his wife, Georgia; and also our grandchildren, Noah, Josie, Camilla and the two babies we await with excitement. You are at the heart of everything I do. Thank you. The SPEAKER 53517 Before I call the honourable member for Hinkler, I remind the House that this is the honourable member's first speech and I ask the House to extend to him the usual courtesies. I give the call to the honourable member for Hinkler. 16:46 Mr BATT 315478 Hinkler Thank you, Mr Speaker. I congratulate you on being re-elected with bipartisan support to your esteemed office for a second term. I stand here humble and proud to have been elected by the people of Hinkler as the 1,248th member of the House of Representatives and fifth member for Hinkler. No matter where my house has been, Hinkler has always been my home. I am Bundaberg born and bred. I have volunteered in my community for over 25 years on sport, not-for-profit, school and church boards. I've had the unique privilege of serving my community at all three levels of government: local, state and now federal. This is an honour that only five per cent of those who have been elected to the Australian parliament since Federation have come to realise. I thank the people of Hinkler for putting their faith in me to represent them in the 48th Parliament of Australia. As I received my lapel pin and electorate medallion from the Serjeant-at-Arms a few weeks ago, I declared, 'They're going straight to the pool room,' a quote from the iconic character Darryl Kerrigan in the 1997 classic Australian movie The Castle. The Kerrigan family are the epitome of Aussie battlers that you can find in every electorate across our great country, people who we all represent. The Castle and its famous one-liners have provided plenty of joy and laughter to my two daughters over many years. My girls are my proudest achievement. My wife, Sharyn, and I have raised Taleigha and Maddy in our castle, a sixth generation of Batts in Bundaberg. While we have never had the fortune of living on the edge of an airport runway, Sharyn and I started our journey together at a Bundy high school social in 1988 and have been married for more than 32 years. Without the love and support of Sharyn, Taleigha and Maddy I wouldn't be standing here today. Both sides of my family first settled in the Bundaberg region in the late 1800s. My parents, Rod and Lyn, are my heroes; they are salt of the earth. I had the honour of writing my very first congratulatory speech and message as the member for Hinkler back on 12 June to my mum and dad to celebrate their 60th wedding anniversary. Mum suffers from macular and is legally blind, and dad is her carer. Although she can see shapes and outlines, it's difficult for her to see faces in detail. A few months ago the family welcomed mum and dad's first great-grandchild, Olivia Grace Batt. My nephew Anthony and his wife Naomi's first child. They live in Brisbane. Mum struggled to see the photos of Olivia even blown up on the iPad, so we brought her around to my place to see if she could see them on my big screen TV. We knew the answer when mum's face lit up and tears welled in her eyes as she touched the TV screen where Olivia's face was. We all looked at each other with lumps in our throats, including dad. Within a week, Dad had decided his 60th anniversary present to Mum was a 98-inch smart TV of their own so Mum can enjoy all the photos she wants. Interestingly enough, it was also seen to get a good workout on the weekends, when Dad has Fox Sports on it as well. The tyranny of age, illness and distance has prevented Mum and Dad from being here today, but I know they'll be watching on that 98-inch TV, as long as one of the family has dropped in to show Dad how to log in online. Mum and Dad, I hope you can see the pride on my face and hear the love in my voice for both of you today and always. Some of my earliest memories are of them both working around the clock for my two brothers and me. Mum and Dad had a convenience shop and petrol station on Mount Perry Road in north Bundaberg. They instilled in me the importance of community service and working hard. Later we had a newspaper run, and it wasn't uncommon to be woken in the early hours when the wrapping machine broke down or the delivery boys called in sick. Bleary eyed, it was out of bed and straight into it—all hands on deck to get papers delivered on time. Dad was knocked off his motor scooter one day, badly dislocating his hip. It put him out action for months. It was hard for our family, but out of the pain and disappointment Mum and Dad bought 200 acres to run cattle as an income stream for the family. For Dad, born on the land not far out of Bundy, this was a natural fit for him to get back to a place he loved, and there was nothing I'd rather have been doing than working alongside him. We would clear the paddock of basalt boulders by hand to plant pasture, buy and sell cattle, and learn how to drive in a little two-person blue Suzuki ute. We also spent a lot of time at the Kendall Flat junior cricket grounds at east Bundaberg, where Dad was instrumental in transforming an old dump site into an eight-field cricket facility. Our weekends were spent maintaining the grounds. Dad was awarded life membership of the Bundaberg Junior Cricket Association, and field 8 is named in his honour—Rod Batt Oval. Dad is the toughest bloke I know. On school holidays I was given the job to mow the fields on a tractor and slasher, which took eight hours. Mum would bring me lunch and a drink halfway through while I gave the slasher a rest. Mum made our three-bedroom weatherboard house a home. We lived close to Walkervale State School, and she had to contend with her three energetic sons and our mates after school. There was never any doubt how much Mum loved us boys. Nothing was ever too much to ask. My older brothers—I made sure I got that in—Paul and Peter, and I are very fortunate. Ours was a happy childhood. The weekends were busy for the Batts. As well as taking us to our loved sports of cricket, rugby league and soccer on Saturdays, on most Sunday mornings Mum would take us boys to church at St Mary's. This formed the cornerstone in my faith journey. Mum and Dad's love for the family was passed down through the ages. It's clear how the apple hadn't fallen far from the tree. Mum was an only child. Born and raised at 54 Victoria Street, which Pard had built after returning from New Guinea in World War II. Pard, or Roy, was a plumber for Bundaberg council and rode his pushbike around town with a tool pouch hanging over the handle bars until he was upgraded to a work vehicle with four wheels. Nan, or Beth, kept the house with precision and pride. My earliest recollection of going over to their house, which continued into my adulthood, was the tranquillity. It was just so quiet—unless Pard was playing the piano, which he learnt by ear. I can still hear his signature tune, which he composed himself. I can also taste that corn relish on country cheddar biscuits, more often than not served up for morning tea. Nan and Pard lived together in that home for more than 65 years, until the day I sat with Pard as he took his last breath in 2007. I scored my first car from Nan and Pard—a 1982 Mazda 929. It even had electric windows—very fancy for a 17-year-old. Dad was from a much larger family. He is one of seven children. As children, in between the paper runs and running the farm, we went to Nanna Batt's every Sunday and met up with our cousins, uncles and aunts. We would settle in at Nanna Batt's at 3 Belvue Street for dinner. I clearly recall the roar of the crowd as the local rugby league played at Salter Oval just one street away. It was a fitting and real-life soundtrack while watching the Brisbane league on the ABC. Then it was time to settle in for the news and, of course, Countdown. The contrast of these two favourite places of mine was not lost on me. From the quiet and peace at Nan and Pard's to the hustle and bustle of Nanna Batt's it was a beautiful balance and both were equally important to my childhood. My brothers, Paul and Peter, have both dedicated more than 35 years to teaching and the Queensland Ambulance Service. Every time someone asks me if I'm related to either of them I know there is a positive story to come. Like my brothers, and even Dad and Nan, I attended Bundaberg State Hight School. I still live by the school's motto, per ardua ad astra, which means: through hard work, the stars. As soon as I turned 15 and was old enough to get a job I started working part-time at Woolies. The deli was my specialty. I intended to become a PE teacher when I finished high school, but it wasn't to be. A chance meeting steered my life on a different path. After speaking with Sergeant Bubb at a careers night in year 12, I applied to join the Queensland Police Force. Each year there were hundreds of applicants but only 100 cadet positions, so I didn't think I stood much of a chance. I was wrong. I didn't want to be a financial burden on my parents, so I deferred my human movements degree and in 1989, straight out of school, I decided to give the police force a go. I left home and moved to the Oxley Academy in Brisbane. I became a detective and for more than 11 years I solved crimes like the Childers Palace Backpackers Hostel fire, which was recently commemorated, after 25 years, and the tragic murder of British backpacker Caroline Stuttle. I was a police officer and detective for almost 20 years before entering my political life. Through policing I witnessed the best and worst of society, and it took a toll on me and my colleagues defending the thin blue line. That is the reason I stepped up and volunteered as a police union rep and then as a peer support officer for almost 15 years of my policing career. I met the now state member for Burnett, my good mate Stephen Bennett, through Rotary Club breakfast meetings held at the Police Citizens Youth Club, or PCYC, where I was the manager. In 2007, with Stephen's support and encouragement, I joined other young professionals on a Rotary group study exchange to Nottingham in England. I was not prepared for how much this life-changing four weeks would open my eyes to the things we could do better in my home town of Bundaberg and across Australia. I thought I'd be a copper until I retired, but out of the study tour I developed a strong desire to see my community thrive. I stepped out of my comfort zone and nominated for the 2008 local government elections. To my surprise, I won the five-horse race for division 8. That's where political life for me began. I served three terms as a councillor and deputy mayor for the Bundaberg Regional Council between 2008 and 2017. So, this place I grew up in, the electorate of Hinkler, is my home. It has and always will have my heart, from where the humpback whales play in waters off Hervey Bay, the world's very first Whale Heritage site, to the historic township of Howard and the beautiful Burrum Heads. There are the friendly townships of Torbanlea, Riverheads and Buxton and the popular coastal locations of Woodgate and Bargara. Childers sits on the Bruce Highway, surrounded by the beautiful red soils that feed our nation—more than 30 different fruit and vegetable crops. Then on the horizon you see the steam from the sugar mill as you weave your way through the cane paddocks and macadamia orchards to Bundaberg, where we know how to make a famous tipple, including our cane champagne. Then it's off to the shores of Mon Repos, where the turtles continue to return and lay their eggs. I love this place. How's the serenity? I know I could have been a better son, brother, husband, father and friend to those I love. Life is about learning from your mistakes, owning them, seeking forgiveness and working towards being a better version of yourself each day. About 10 years ago I returned to regular Sunday mass at Bundaberg's Holy Rosary. It gave me the opportunity to understand my life much better and to listen, learn and love. I try each day to follow in the footsteps of Jesus: to give of yourself, to love unconditionally and serve your community, to be a voice for the voiceless, to help those who are helpless and to give comfort to those who are struggling in their lives. It is about taking time to appreciate the simple things, to look up at the full moon and stars, to take in the sunsets and not get caught up in life itself—find gratitude in the little moments each and every day, one step at a time. As Matthew wrote: So do not worry about tomorrow; for tomorrow will care for itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own. When Taleigha and Maddy were born, Sharyn and I made it our ambition to ensure that we could get them through school and university and set them up for their lives ahead. We couldn't have done it without the love, care and support of Sharyn's mum and dad, Barb and Doug, and brother Brad and my mum and dad and the Batt clan. The girls' uncles, aunties and cousins have been part of their journey, and we are so blessed we are all such a close family group. Although it was sad to see both girls leave home, only in the last two years, Sharyn and I are so proud that they are set up for whatever path they choose. Both have loving partners and wonderful careers and have purchased their first homes. To walk my youngest, Maddy, down the aisle, or the road, a few weeks ago at her fairytale wedding to our new son-in-law, Zane, was such a proud dad moment. I understand the pressures of elected office. As a former councillor, deputy mayor and state MP, every action of mine has been on display for public scrutiny, no more than in January of 2013 with the record breaking Bundaberg floods. People of my community were rescued from the roofs of their homes. Devastation was everywhere you looked. As the Burnett River roared and broke its banks due to the deluge associated with ex-tropical-cyclone Oswald, there was destruction to over 2,000 homes and 600 businesses, and there were major issues with community infrastructure. North Bundaberg had the largest mandatory evacuation in peacetime Australia; some 7,500 residents were evacuated. More than 20 military and civilian helicopters winched hundreds of people to safety from their rooftops and not a single life was lost. While the disaster response and recovery were not without issues, Bundaberg's response is still used as a case study in disaster management circles right across Australia. It is something everyone who was involved should be very proud of. Coordinating the disaster recovery, as the then deputy mayor of Bundaberg, was the single most challenging task in my professional career. I worked around the clock to assist people who were traumatised and enduring the hardest time of their lives. I was honoured to receive Rotary's Paul Harris Fellow for my leadership and humbled that the late federal member for Hinkler Paul Neville attributed some of Bundaberg's positive recovery and response to my efforts. While I'd always enjoyed positive working efforts with local MPs as the recovery coordinator, I also established good rapport with various ministers, including our newly elected Queensland Premier, David Crisafulli, who was at that time the Minister for Local Government, Community Recovery and Resilience. David's no-nonsense attitude during the recovery was a breath of fresh air and changed my mind about what state government is capable of. I for one will never forget the commitment he showed to rebuilding Bundaberg well after the floodwaters had subsided and the television news crews had lost interest. That is the reason I took a leap into state parliament. Reflecting on my term in state politics from 2017 to 2020, representing the people of Bundaberg was a special time. I was only the second member of a conservative political party to have held the state seat since it was created in 1888. In 2017, I was the first to call and fight for a new hospital, and it's on its way. I called for an inquiry into the problems facing Paradise Dam, and now it's being rebuilt to secure water for our farmers. The state stint lasted only the one term. My bid for re-election came down to the finest of margins—after the recount, just nine votes. The year was 2020, and the loss in this state election absolutely gutted me, both personally and for my staff. We had committed so much to building a better community. The lesson learnt? Every vote really does count. The silver lining through all of this was the chance to reset and recharge. The break following the Queensland election did so much good for me mentally and spiritually. I took six months off work to reflect, reconnect and re-order my priorities. It gave me more time for my family, friends and to volunteer in my church life. I'm still rostered on once a month to clean and vacuum Holy Rosary Church. The pain of an election loss eased as I realised God had another plan for me. I'm a giver. I always have been. But from that moment it wasn't going to be with my colleagues in state parliament, those who I'm proud to call my friends, including my first-term colleagues of 2017: the now Queensland Police Minister Dan Purdie; Jim McDonald, the member for Lockyer; the member for Nicklin, Marty Hunt; transport minister, Brent Mickelburg; my old committee buddy and now Speaker of the House, Pat Weir; and, of course, Queensland Premier, David Crisafulli. My term in Queensland parliament gave me fuel and a desire to keep making a difference in my community. I've spoken about the three levels of government and the honour it has been to have now served in each. A neighbour and friend, the member for Flynn, Colin Boyce, has also achieved the trifecta. I had the honour of sitting next to Colin in the Queensland parliament and it's an absolute pleasure to be with him here, this time in the 48th Parliament of Australia. In the period between my time in state politics and earlier this year, winning pre-selection for the LNP in Hinkler, I had the role of community resilience and disaster management officer at Bundaberg Regional Council, a role that drew on my experiences from 2013. Earlier this year, as I made the decision to nominate for the seat of Hinkler, I was still working full time in preparing my community for the impact of Tropical Cyclone Alfred. Alfred did strike my community and the most telling impact locally was the inundation of 1,600 homes and businesses in Hervey Bay. Record-breaking flash flooding surprised everyone and led to a recovery that is still ongoing today—a recovery in Hervey Bay I will support to the end. Today, I stand here and reflect on those who have laid the platform and left a legacy in the seat of Hinkler. While the electoral boundaries have changed throughout time, Hinkler was created in 1984. It was named in honour of pioneering aviator Bert Hinkler. Born in Bundaberg in 1892, the son of a millworker, Bert was the first to fly solo from England to Australia, a feat achieved in 1928. He built his first glider in Bundaberg. While bin chickens get a bad rap today, it was the humble ibis that inspired his creation. At the time, Bert was considered by many as the most daring man in the world. He epitomised the strength of those I represent. It might be almost 100 years since Bert's historic flight, but his determination, ambition, strength and passion are all traits instilled in the people of Hinkler. I'd like to acknowledge the former MPs who have held office and represented the seat we call Hinkler. The first was the late Bryan Conquest; followed by Brian Courtice; then the late, great Paul Neville, a stalwart of the National Party; and, prior to the 2025 election, my predecessor, Keith Pitt, who served for almost 12 years. Keith laid a platform for me and my team going forward. This quote from Benjamin E Mays sums up my thoughts on Paul and Keith, who I'm proud to call my friends: We, today, stand on the shoulders of our predecessors who have gone before us. We, as their successors, must catch the torch of freedom and liberty passed on to us by our ancestors. We cannot lose in this battle. I'd like to acknowledge and sincerely thank all the Hinkler LNP members, supporters and volunteers who worked tirelessly throughout my campaign, especially my Hinkler campaign team. My vision is simple. People who live in the greatest country on earth should have the same opportunities whether they live in the city or country. I'm sure everybody in this chamber is here for a similar reason—to make the improvements required and leave behind a better place than the one that we entered. We must set an example in this House and debate policies, not personalities. I will ensure that this Bundy boy will also serve my community of Hervey Bay with passion and commitment. I am pleased to have secured an electorate office in Hervey Bay. It has a population of almost 70,000 and it will be a priority of mine to ensure this important region of Hinkler is not forgotten. Global trade, defence in a volatile world, energy challenges, the digital transformation and the impacts of artificial intelligence—these are all very real challenges for all of us across this country, including in my community of Hinkler. I know the members sitting across from me, representing their communities, whether in the inner-city areas of Sydney and Melbourne or even in other regional areas, want to improve the lives of their constituents, but this cannot be to the detriment of other areas and regions like Hinkler. Yes, all Aussies deserve a nice home, cheaper living standards and a fantastic family lifestyle, but, please, do not make decisions affecting other electorates that you wouldn't want to implement in your own. I'll always fight for my home of Hinkler to ensure we get our fair share, and that there is support for small and family businesses to employ locals. There must be action to address the cost of living, and we must deliver more health services for regional Australia. We need to find a balanced, affordable energy mix. Our veterans must be treated with respect and always supported, and I'll always back our rich and diverse agricultural industry as it continues to form the region's economic engine. I want to do what's right, not necessarily what's popular. For being granted this immense privilege to be in this, the 48th Parliament of Australia, I accept the great responsibility that comes with it. Since parliament opened last week, I have been privileged to listen to the first speeches of our class of 2025, kicking off with the member for Dickson and finishing this afternoon with the member for McPherson. What an eclectic lot we are. Yet there are many themes so similar right across this chamber—the love and support of family and friends, a wanting to give back to your community and the vision to make this country a better place. It's not just the class of 2025. I'm sure all in this chamber have had similar stories to tell. We are the leaders of this amazing, free country. Each of our electorates form a unique part of the Australian fabric, woven into our tapestry of life. We need to lead from the front and be positive role models, like our mums and dads, nannas, nans, pas and our fearless pioneers. Fight like Darryl did in The Castle, not only for your loved ones but for your community. I understand that being here is a privilege and not a right, so I make this commitment: I will serve the people of Hinkler with honesty, integrity and compassion for as long as they will have me represent them in this House. The SPEAKER 53517 Before I call the honourable member for Lyne, I remind the House this is the honourable member's first speech, and I ask the House to extend to her the usual courtesies. 17:12 Ms PENFOLD 248895 Lyne 'She was there for me, there for us. She always had our back; she was never backward in fighting for us. She made a difference much larger than one single voice, one single person, could hope to achieve. She put service before self.' I know that standing here today, you may find it odd that I speak of myself in the past tense, to speak of legacy as the member for Lyne and as a parliamentarian. But I wish to start my first speech as I wish to end my time in this place. To do so represents my mission and my compact with the people of the Lyne electorate: to work hard, listen, care and deliver for my constituents and the people of Australia. It's a simple motivator, but it's deeply rooted. It's the legacy of a working-class family, the legacy of my upbringing: grandparents who were in domestic service and parents whose retail small business—Ron's Market Truck—served people at markets across Western Sydney, in Fairfield, Mount Druitt, Penrith, Menangle, and then Taree for many years. They were spruiking off the back of a truck everything from the latest toys to towels, figurines, fireworks and items that most people could not afford to buy elsewhere. 'Knock a bit off, Ronnie,' the crowd would call—and he did. This is where I spent my weekends as a child, and where I saw the raw, hard work of a seven-days-a-week small business operator. This raw, hard work, risk-taking and sacrifice for family must never be forgotten in this place. It's why, in part, I'm here—to honour and protect them and ensure that the only decisions government takes are to ensure small business thrives. Mr Speaker, I stand before you and this parliament as just an ordinary woman trying to do an extraordinary job with an extraordinary privilege for my community and for our nation. It's a job that stands on the shoulders of those members of parliament who too have served as members for Lyne—Gillespie, Oakeshott, Vaile, Cowan, Lucock and Eggins. Each of them made significant contributions to this place and to the electorate of Lyne. I am fortunate to have known four of the previous members and to have worked for two of them. Mark Vaile was a deputy prime minister, delivering our free trade agreement with the United States—one that must endure—and the Pacific Highway duplication for the electorate. Dr David Gillespie was a minister, delivering over $1 billion in regional health initiatives, and the father and chairman of our future civil nuclear program and the father of the Taree Universities Campus, amongst many electorate achievements. I hope to serve as they did, with great honour, distinction and grace. I thank them for their friendship, guidance and trust over the many years I have known each of them. It's wonderful to have David and Charlotte here today. They, too, have seen the devastation on our communities that nature can bring. They know that Lyne is very much an electorate cemented in the courage and tenacity of Australians and of regional people. It's an area on the Mid North Coast and Hunter regions of New South Wales and the ancestral home to the Biripi, Worimi and Wonnarua peoples. We now share in the stewardship of a land long lived. It's an electorate stretching from the Hastings to the Hunter, covering coast and country. The electorate covers some of the earliest areas of regional settlement, places like Paterson, where my own Penfold ancestors migrated to as farm labourers in the 1830s. That settlement continues today as tree changers and sea changers exit the big smoke to find their dreams of a beach oasis or farm life. Farming, dairy, beef, oyster and timber industries remain valued economic drivers with the many family-run small businesses. This is a place that has hosted heavy industry and manufacturing businesses migrating from the cities. It's a region that still has much physical and human capital to offer. Rivers have long been the lifeblood of this area. They have brought fertile soils, trade, settlement, families and livelihoods. We know the power of them, and this has helped forge the courage and tenacity to make homes and build businesses that could withstand flood and also fire. But no-one could have anticipated the flood of this May, a one-in-500-year catastrophic event. Off the back of months of rain, the ground was saturated. It was just four years from our last major flood. I cannot do justice to it or its full impact. To be honest, I find what occurred very difficult to talk about, to relive the days during the flood and after the waters receded—stuck at home in safety but unable to physically reach people desperate for help. There were the images on our screens and the screams for aid by phone, email and private message. The first chance to provide help was in Coopernook. My car engine was smoking through the floodwaters, but I was desperate to bring milk, bread and other staples to the local hall, where 60-plus people were bunkered down, isolated, many evacuated from their nearby farms. It was there that I heard of the first death in the floodwaters, only the morning after. The loss of a loved local was felt painfully but quietly through the town. As the first roads opened after the waters receded, what presented was metres of mud through everything and the house-high piles of timber, round bales and other debris that littered and still linger on the landscape. There were the stories of survival, of having to leave people, pets and possessions behind. There was the bravery of modest souls who went into the floodwaters to save others. There was the look of despair, of fragility and of losing everything in people's eyes. There was the anger and the fear when the government support did not come. The fight goes on for fairness, recognition and hope. Like many others, I tried to help, with my hands and my heart the only tools to turn back the tide of destruction in those early days. But my resolve was strengthened. I was where I was needed and needed to be. The physical scars are there for all to see: river banks changed forever, Wingham Brush gone, roads and bridges destroyed, towns and communities divided, acres of paddocks washed away, paddocks with a mirage of green, winter feed flattened, paddocks emptied of cattle or turf, empty shops that will likely never be home to a small business again, and homes now emptied of the lives they once loved. Less visitable are the mental scars. Most people have tried to pick up the pieces of their lives. They've got on with the clean-up, got on with the rebuild, got on with filling out the vast reams of paperwork for a few quid, got on with finding somewhere to live, got on with going back to work and got on with life. But underneath is the loss, the shock, the grief, the uncertainty, the despair, the fear, the emotional triggers of hearing cows bellowing in the night, the mere threat of rain and the question, 'Can I ever go home?' These emotional scars are the scars that scare me the most. I'm scared of how people are coping and for the many that are not—if and when they'll ever seek support from a professional, a mate, a family member or from me. When the Prime Minister, the Premier and other ministers came to Taree in the aftermath of the floods, I said to them that our area needed two things from government: information and presence. It needed presence in the form of boots, not suits. It needed a long-term presence in the form of generous and easy-to-access support and it needed the presence of mind to break the cycle of red tape that haunts the traumatised seeking help after disaster. Our area needed information from government about the process for making decisions about assistance. It needed information about when and how funding amounts and eligibility would be determined. And it needed government to listen to what the community needed, to hear our information so that government could make good decisions. I was deliberate in this ask, knowing that the mental toll could be moderated if people knew that support was coming; if they knew that governments were working to provide them with the assistance that was needed without red tape attached; and if they knew that governments cared. My greatest frustration is that this call has largely gone unheeded. The anger that has been felt amongst the community has come from the silence, the slowness and the mountain of bureaucracy. It's come from the weeks of silence waiting for cat. D funding for primary producers and now the additional weeks waiting on additional funding for small business, funding for the rebuilding and funding for the betterment of community infrastructure like the Bight and Tiri bridges. It's come from the weeks of not having somewhere to live, for themselves or their farm workers. And it's come because of the bureaucracy. Too many people and businesses have been denied support. They've not had enough paperwork, they've not been enough of a primary producer, or they're living in an area bureaucrats say isn't affected enough, places like Barrington. Some have not been the right type of not-for-profit, like Taree Universities Campus and the Taree Aquatic Club, both unable to receive any support yet smashed by the floodwaters. Then there are the farmers desperate to stabilise river and creek banks but wading through multiple state government agencies for approval with no start or end point. It is unsurprising that so many local people feel it is easier to get government assistance if you're a foreigner than it is if you're an Australian. On the weekend, I spoke with a small-business operator from Taree. Her premises in Pulteney Street were completely inundated. She is now in a battle with her insurer, months later and still waiting. She can't apply for any of the government assistance until she gets a decision from the insurer, and the government's application timeframe is coming to an end soon. This is a strong woman who has been almost broken by a process that is meant to support her. The waiting, the silence and the bureaucracy have only compounded the mental toll, compounded the feeling of being forgotten, compounded the anger and frustration in government, and compounded the fear about the future. We needed governments and bureaucracies at their best. We're still waiting and we're still hoping, but we're still fighting. We needed media at its best, too. I thank our local journalists and the many others from around the country, who respected us, helped the nation see the destruction and called it to action with donations. Please don't forget about us. We have a long, long way to go. I wish to dedicate this speech to all those impacted by the floods and to all the amazing volunteers who, after the waters receded, went from stranger to family in an instant by just turning up and saying, 'Mate, how can I help?' These were not just our well-trained legends in familiar uniforms—the SES, Fire and Rescue, police, Rural Fire Service or the many familiar local organisations, like church groups, service and community organisations Rotary and Lions or sporting clubs, like the Forster Tuncurry Hawks junior rugby league team, who I worked with to help clean out the mud-logged Sailo's, or members of the Wingham Tigers footy team, who I met cleaning out a shed in Primrose Street in Wingham—but also the incredibly generous, spontaneous and selfless locals and people from afar. These were everyday citizens doing the extraordinary for others. I acknowledge people like Josh Hack, Tim Bale and Anthony and Matt Stone for their fierce advocacy for farmers. The Stone brothers, oysters farmers on the Manning River, battled the floodwaters to save many people from their homes, yet have had to battle bureaucracy for Cat D assistance despite losing almost all their oyster stock, and their retail business being inundated and shut down for months. I also acknowledge Matthew Fawcett, who is here today, President of the Taree Chamber of Commerce, for his leadership for local small businesses and the many others that have joined him in the cause. Not only do we need Cat D funding for small business but also need a Taree CBD revitalisation package, including commercial building buybacks in the worst affected area of Pulteney Street. The flood recovery and rebuild will be a key focus of my time and energy, but I know my voice and that of this parliament and government is needed on so many other local issues: on roads and bridges and telecommunications, housing and health, community infrastructure, aged and disability care, and industry and jobs to name a few. We are not a wealthy electorate. We are older and poorer than most. Our major employers were lost to bean counters chasing cheap labour offshore. Bureaucracy and the digital world is too often a maze for so many locals that forever needs unscrambling. Our councils are battered by ageing infrastructure and the unfairness of the financial assistance grants formula. When we as Nationals call for more funding, more programs and more support from government for our electorates, it's because our communities need it to survive, to thrive, to get a fair go. So my job in this parliament will be to work constructively with the government so that together we can solve problems like ensuring the Dungog Shire Community Centre is properly funded by Services Australia to continue to its important Centrelink service delivery and provide the resources, other services and infrastructure my communities need to improve living standards, to live with dignity, to grow, to be rich in spirit and diverse in activities. Today I wish to start with one request, one that aligns with the government's own priorities. Taree desperately needs an urgent care clinic. This was a commitment I made at the election—one left unmatched by Labor, despite the many clinics it committed to other in seats. It is an initiative the government has heralded, an initiative that does not exist between Coffs Harbour and Newcastle. It is a gaping hole in the network. In good faith, under the umbrella of the Prime Minister's commitment to govern for all, I ask for the government's goodwill to work with me to deliver one in Taree and help improve the health outcomes of the people of Manning Valley. This is my first ask but far from my last. I'm immensely honoured to be put to work for them by the people of the Lyne electorate, to represent a part of Australia where I grew up, the beautiful Harrington and Hannam Vale, where I went to school at St Clare's High School in Taree and call home the timbertown of Wauchope, and all the towns and villages that live proud in this part of the Mid North Coast and Hunter. I thank the people of Lyne from the bottom of my heart for this tremendous honour, and, through my election by them, to be put to work by the people of Australia to contribute to the building our nation. While our democracy is robust our nation is not. Our productivity is weak, the cost of living is crippling families, pensioners and businesses; immigration and government spending is out of control; our military capabilities mismatch to the threats to our shore; our foreign policy too often sounds like it was written in the uni bar; and our country is divided—one confused with three flags, not proudly one. We are pursuing a European energy policy at great cost to our nation, economically, environmentally and socially, with no return on addressing climate change. This policy is only making us weaker and poorer—weaker because we're building a fragile energy grid, not a resilient and powerful one, and poorer because we've lost our comparative advantage in energy. The more that renewables have come on the market, the higher energy prices have become for all Australians, hurting our poorest and most vulnerable the most. I'm no climate change denier. Like many Australians, I'm just a climate change realist. For millennia, we as humans have faced the impact of the complex natural system of our climate. Our understanding of our impact on it has matured and, with that, so has the issue matured in our social and political psyche. It is for Australia to be part of the global response, but, as a realist, I accept that we humans cannot fully control carbon and its impact on our climate, nor can Australia disproportionately bear the cost of the net zero global response. It is regional Australia that is bearing the full cost—bearing all of the risks of the transition and none of the benefits. This government is asking renewables to do the heavy lifting they simply weren't designed to do, and we are asking Australians to pay the price for it. Just ask the people of Hawks Nest in my electorate, staring down at an offshore industrial wind farm in the pristine waters off Port Stephens. Government has a huge responsibility to get this policy right, a policy that should try to mitigate what we can, sensibly, reasonably and proportionately, and adapt to what we can't. But, critically, it must be a policy that puts Australians first and that gives current and future generations the same economic liberties to increase their standard of living. What I see and fear now is an Australia where the pluckiness and pragmatism of our forefathers has vanished, replaced with a state sanctioned retreat from the pursuit of real national wealth and prosperity, retreat from our history, retreat from our Christian values, retreat from common sense. We are going small and losing big. We are told disruption, now often the code for progressivism, is good for us. It's got a social licence, we're told—'Sign on; Australia will be better for it.' But are we? Beyond our structural, economic and strategic decline, it's clear our family and social structures are faltering. Our kids are spending on average nine hours a day in front of a computer or TV screen. Literacy and numeracy rates are falling. Our kids are learning to criticise rather than think critically. The narcissism permitted and projected through social media is ruining lives and destroying families. Domestic violence rates are rising. We are trying to deny human nature, teaching our kids that you can choose your gender any day of the week or be a furry in the classroom. I've heard stories of young men and women choosing not to bring children into this world because of the fear of the world we're becoming. At a time of such regional and global geopolitical instability, Australia can ill afford to lose its way. We must change course; we must step up. This place must lead. Where can we start? We must return to the values that have made Australia strong—those Christian values that so many of us have been raised on. If you don't believe in something, you'll fall for anything. We must reinvest in family and the family unit by pursuing policies that give families real choice in raising their children and help increase our natural birth rate. Income splitting is sensible, as is the concerted efforts of all tiers of government to genuinely address the housing crisis. Young Australians are locked into housing servitude and we should not be surprised that they are angry at us for it. This is not the great Australian dream they deserve. We must address the social discord and the impact of identity politics, in particular on children. The reinstating of the biological definition of male and female into the Sex Discrimination Act is needed. Gender is simply not fluid, even if sexual orientation is. We must break the cycle of multigenerational welfare dependency so every child has an adult role model in their life that values a day's work. We must get back to the basics on economic policy, efficient government and restraint from intergenerational economic theft, backing small business as the engine room of the economy and supporting policies that address Australia's falling manufacturing complexity and subsequent growth prospects. We must stop regulatory creep and overregulation, the thinking that government knows how to do business better, which is insidious and pervasive on small business and industry. I'm sick and tired of all tiers of government making laws and policies based on the emotion driven by activists that ban industries. It adds costs to business, stymies innovation and makes our exporters uncompetitive. In this frame, agriculture and farmers are too often the whipping boy for this government and the Left. We must return to an immigration policy founded on 'team Australia' not 'hotel Australia', one where our shared values matter—the basis of our multicultural success story. We must build an energy system that can support the energy needs of industry and an AI/data-hungry world. That requires lots and lots of energy density—base-load power, power that is on all the time, not just some of the time. If this government was to truly consider our energy policy on a net benefit basis, they too would support zero emissions nuclear power, along with coal and gas, using existing technology to reduce emissions. Labor's version of net zero and its pursuit of it is not the right pathway for Australia to a cleaner, greener and more prosperous future. We must use military precision in our defence procurement to rebuild our defence capability. This is a dangerous time of greater power competition. The threats are real, and they are unconventional, but we are no longer equipped to fight the enemy at our door. Our defence personnel and our veterans deserve the equipment that matches their skill, discipline and dedication, whatever the price for the sacrifice they make and the security Australians deserve. The defence of our nation should be a subject of great pride to every Australian. Yet during the campaign, when I raised it at meet-the-candidate forums, those in the room supporting Labor, Greens and teal candidates sneered and scoffed. It was and is an outrageous response to the importance of the defence of our nation and the genuine security risk we face. It's why government leadership matters. I'm very proud to be here as a representative of the Nationals, a party I first came to support as a polling-booth volunteer in my teenage years. We are not a party of ideologues but of pragmatists who believe strongly in the values our nation was founded on. We believe in the wisdom of the bush—that new ways shouldn't always usurp the old and that the regions should keep more of the nation's wealth it generates. In this place we have always leveraged more than our numbers suggest, a record of achievement that is not done with yet. That said, I am here as only the second woman from the New South Wales Nationals to be elected to the House of Representatives in the history of this parliament—a statement that should horrify and shock. I follow in the footsteps of the great Kay Hull, former member for Riverina, who stood in this place from 1998 to 2010, a warrior for the regions then and now. Kay always spoke her mind and spoke up for her people. She has been a wonderful role model and mentor to me, and I thank her for her genuine support. I do not intend to use my time here as an evangelical warrior on female representation in politics. We as women should seek favour through a system that shines a light on the best talent in the room, but making sure women are in the room is still the great challenge. It is a challenge that requires genuine investment by our party membership and leadership, myself included. I would like to thank the party members and supporters from across the Lyne electorate for putting their faith in me after the long career of their much-respected and loved former member Dr David Gillespie. Transitioning a seat is never an easy task or one with a certain outcome. There are so many to thank—too much to do justice to in this speech—but several certainly stand out: David Gillespie, Junerose Richardson, Rob Connell, Rosemary Chick, Vicki Hansen, Carolyn Fowler, Sally Halliday, and Kate and Steve Mansur—and Bill Jones, who lost part of his finger helping my dad make A-frames. I would also like to thank the federal Nationals and New South Wales Nationals leadership: Kay Hull; federal director Lincoln Folo; current chairman of the New South Wales Nationals, the Hon. Rick Colless; former chairman Andrew Fraser; state director Tory Menschelyi—my bestie—and the team at head office. Tory is a relentless campaigner, generous with her time and support and a smart head and steady hand. Your dad would be so immensely proud of you. All of the team were of tremendous assistance and support, and I extend my sincere gratitude to them. I have spent more than half of my professional life in this building, from my work experience with Mark Vaile in 1994 to my various roles as receptionist, whips clerk and adviser to chief of staff with the late Hon. Peter Reith, the Hon. Mark Vaile, the Hon. Warren Truss, the Hon. David Littleproud MP, the Hon. Kevin Hogan MP and the Hon. Dr David Gillespie. I've had the great honour of working in government and opposition. I've seen government at its best and at its worst. I've seen the political cycles of the coalition and Labor come and go. I've learned so much from all of you, and thank you for the trust and opportunity you have given me. I would also like to acknowledge Wendy Vaile, Lyn Truss, Charlotte Gillespie and Karen Hogan—all amazing women, patient and forgiving. I thank you for your friendship, support and understanding when my job interrupted your lives. I thank my many former work colleagues who, in some shape or form, have been part of this 30-plus-year apprenticeship. Too often, this place speaks cruelly of the staff of MPs and ministers. The work of politics attracts magnificent minds who make huge sacrifices to work quietly, patiently, empathetically and diligently to do good for this nation. There is no Public Service Medal for political and policy staff. The job is to walk in the shadows of the room—not to be nameless, just not to be named. To all of you who I've worked with over the years: I thank you for your camaraderie, your guidance and your common sense. I particularly want to pay tribute to some of them: Cheryl Cartwright and Kate Barwick—not only great friends but great campaigners too. I owe you both a huge debt of gratitude, and also to Andrew Hall, Candice Stower, Robert Nardella, Gerrie Van Dam, Jen Southwell, Bronwyn Morris, Lachie McComish and Philip Eliason. Outside of parliament, I've shared in the privilege of working for business big and small. There's been no greater challenge in my professional career than to take on the task of CEO of the live export industry just six months after the 2011 ban. I pay tribute to the two chairmen I worked under, Peter Kane and the late Hon. Simon Crean, and to Sam Brown, my CEO colleague at LiveCorp—all men of immense wisdom. I thank them for their courage and willingness to support me as I led the industry through significant change, including the development of a social-licence strategy for the live export industry, the first of its kind of any agricultural industry sector at the time. The fact that Labor has chosen to cruel the livelihoods of thousands of sheep producers rather than properly regulate just three live export companies is a travesty of justice, made harsher by the ongoing refusal to compensate live-cattle producers as the court has demanded. I do not come from a big family. I am an only child and grew up, essentially, as an only grandchild. I will never have the privilege of being an aunt. I'm unmarried and childless by circumstance, not choice, so family has always been more than just blood relations. It's about those people in your life that are always there, in good times and bad. To Tony and Vicki Hansen: you mean more to me than words can ever express. Thank you for your unwavering support, your love and generosity, and the beautiful gift of godmotherhood. To Andrew—here tonight—and Kate, and Ashlea and Tim; and their children, Lennox, Huxley, Buddy and my youngest goddaughter, Scout: I'm so proud of all of you and so grateful to call you family. Scout, I can't wait to see your journey in life. Art, sport—whatever you decide—the world is yours. During the campaign, I lost my beloved aunt Valerie, who died suddenly in her home on her 85th birthday. She was due to fly down to be part of the last week of the campaign. It is still hard to process this loss. My aunt was a larger-than-life individual, never truly bound by societal expectations. She was a traveller, artist, gourmet home chef, linguist, raconteur and armchair political commentator. I can only hope to be as bold and brave as her. I know she's with her beloved husband—oh, wise one, Uncle Barry—willing me on in this challenge to question the status quo and never—never—take no for an answer. My beautiful mum, Aileen, we lost to pancreatic cancer almost 12 years ago. You never get over the loss of a parent, and it's hard to reconcile the passage of time with the memories that are so near. My mother was a woman ahead of her time. She had incredible strength and determination and a deep belief in fairness and justice. In another age, she would have been a member of parliament and a fierce one at that. I intend to bring her fierceness to this place to honour her memory. Finally, to my dad, Ron, my man of resolve: you are my hero and my north star. You made huge sacrifices in your life so I didn't have to make them in mine. I'm so proud of you. From poor beginnings, you have made such a rich life—customs officer, tug master, entrepreneur, farmer, motor home manufacturer and, above all, a man of honour, a man everyone should have as a mate and a best friend. I'm so pleased that you have found Maree and are trying to live your best life despite the fragility that hard work and age brings. Thank you for all you do and for your patience with me. As I wind up my commentary here today, I say this to the people of the Lyne electorate and to all Australians. I intend to honour your faith, courage and determination to live your best lives by putting service to you before self. I can't promise you the world you deserve, but I will guarantee I'll have a go at delivering it. With that, let's get cracking. The SPEAKER 53517 Before I call the honourable member for McPherson, I remind the House that this is the honourable member's first speech. I ask the House to extend to him the usual courtesies. 17:48 Mr REBELLO 316547 McPherson It is with deep humility and immense pride that I rise to deliver my first speech in this House as the newly elected member for McPherson. Not long ago I sat in this chamber not as a participant in debate but as a parliamentary attendant, a silent observer to the great conversations that shape our nation. I listened, I learned and I grew in my resolve to one day add my voice to the legacy of our national story. Today, that day has come, and I rise with gratitude to my community, with reverence for this institution and our great democracy and with a commitment to serve with integrity, energy and purpose. My presence here today is a testament to our national character—that someone who once sorted mail in the basement of this very building can ascend from humble beginnings to define the future of our nation as a member of parliament. I am proud to be the first to make this journey, but I sincerely hope I'm not the last. Ours is a country where opportunities can be seized, through hard work, perseverance and belief in the value of public service, and where every voice, regardless of where it begins, can contribute to the great tapestry of our shared Australian journey. I will always come to this place as a place of service—to the people of McPherson, to my state of Queensland and to my country. I feel blessed that I had a remarkable childhood. I benefited from a world-class education, a multicultural family that embraced a global perspective, the freedom to practise my faith freely, and the love and support of a strong family unit. My father is a tradie, an electrician and refrigeration mechanic. My mother is a dedicated public servant, still working in the service of her country to this day. To get ahead they worked second jobs, took risks to invest in property and small business and never questioned their obligation to stand on their own two feet. Weekends weren't for rest. They were for renovating houses for extra money and printing tickets for milk bottle deliveries as part of our family business. We were optimistic, not because we had wealth but because we believed in effort. And when our hard work paid off we felt pride in having earned the rewards. Together we supported one other as much as we relied upon one another. We were a family. My upbringing was a traditional middle-class Australian story. It was grounded in values of personal responsibility, self-determination and respect for the institutions on which Australia was built. As migrants, my parents never let a day pass without reminding me to hold a deep and profound gratitude for all that Australia made possible. I stand in this place because of their quiet patriotism and because they raised me to believe in Australia and in her promise, and that service in her name is a tremendous calling. It is no wonder these values took me to the Liberal Party here in the ACT and the Liberal National Party in the great state of Queensland. I joined the Liberal Party because I was taught to believe in personal responsibility—that if you drop something you pick it up, and if you want something you work for it. And yes, I may not be a stereotypical Liberal, but I am a Liberal—proudly, unapologetically. I'm a Liberal because I trust Australians to make decisions for themselves and I believe that the role of government is to lift people up, not lock them in. I'm a Liberal because I believe in limited government, not out of a desire for less but because I believe Australians are capable of far more. And I'm a Liberal because I believe in giving Australians a stake in the economy through free enterprise and home ownership and that this is more important than giving them a stake in the government. We are a party that has stood for what's decent, what's compassionate and, more often than not, what's grounded in common sense. My start in life was available to me as the beneficiary of an Australia that my parents came here for—an Australia where one's fortune was the result of their determination and contribution, an Australia that understood that aspiration, not entitlement, was the foundation for progress. But that Australia is becoming harder to recognise. Across this country, among men and women, young and old, there's a growing sense of disempowerment. Too many Australians feel discouraged to dream, strive and achieve. I stand here today for them, and because I fear we are losing our way. We have drifted from celebrating self-reliance to being conditioned to expect government to step in, not just in times of crisis but in place of personal initiative. Our national psyche has evolved, whereby the instinct to prepare for a rainy day is dulled by an expectation of government intervention. This mindset has not just taken hold in our community; it has infected government itself, where short-term spending too often replaces long-term discipline. And we have fallen in love with regulation that is punitive to the many, instead of making an example of the few who set out to do the wrong thing. In our desire to shield Australians from hardship, we are wrapping the population in cotton and, in doing so, we are stifling our national spirit. We risk being slowly pulled into the quicksand of bureaucracy, overreach and ideologically driven agendas that forget that it is the individual that is at the heart of our democracy. The result in my electorate is a housing crisis, where young Australians are now unable to afford a home, and, even worse, everyday working people are less able to afford rent and essentials. I come to this place to reignite the traditional role of government as an enabler instead of a provider, and I seek to reinforce the role of the Australian parliament as future focused, placing Australia and her people foremost in every decision we make. In my time in this place, it is my duty and privilege to represent the people of McPherson, to share with this place their thoughts and their values and to work hard to ensure that they get the attention of government when they need it. Equally important, I'm committed to crafting a future Australia that they can take pride in. I'll contribute to the domestic and international agendas that will define our nation's path forward, ensuring our future is a positive evolution built upon the foundation of our past. I'll seek to address new-world challenges without weakening our old-world values. The greatest reforms we will achieve in this place will not be coupled with great expense. They'll not be marked by grand monuments; nor will they burden the public with costs of creation and upkeep. The greatest reforms will be those that redefine how we conduct ourselves as Australians, both as individuals and as a nation. We are navigating a national identity crisis, and it's imperative that we restore a deep sense of purpose. We must reignite our national spirit, set the bounds for our shared identity and rediscover our values and basic common sense. In his farewell address, President Reagan put the question to Americans: 'Are we doing a good enough job of teaching our children what America is and what she represents in the long history of the world?' I ask the same of us here in Australia. We must reignite an unambivalent appreciation of Australia and the Western values that form the foundation of our nation. This will give us the resolve and the capacity to confront the pressing challenges that demand urgent attention. We face a population surge fuelled by a reckless immigration profile, one that no longer reflects the careful planning or national interest that critically underpinned our migration success story. In allowing this, we risk diminishing both the privilege of coming to Australia and the cohesion that has long made our multicultural society a strength, not a strain. The desire to come to Australia, while admirable, should not be the sole qualification. It is the willingness to contribute to Australia that must be the true test. Having studied in Europe, I've witnessed the social and economic pressures that arise when migration is poorly managed: rising social tensions, buckling infrastructure, divided communities. These are no longer abstract policy debates; they are lived realities overseas. We would do well to heed these warnings. At the same time, our education standards are falling, with too many young Australians leaving school not only lacking the skills to succeed but also uncertain of who we are as a nation. There is a growing detachment from our history, our democratic institutions and our values. A generation is emerging that is less proud of Australia and has little understanding of how fragile yet precious our democracy truly is—that it must be understood, defended and never taken for granted. This is not just an academic concern; it's a national one. Civic education has been neglected for too long, and it must be installed at the heart of our national curriculum, to teach young Australians why pride in Australia is justified. Our welfare system, once a vital safety net for those in genuine need, has ballooned into something broader and, in many cases, far less targeted. Too often support is now distributed based on identity rather than circumstance. Compassion should not be measured by how much we spend but by how effectively we lift people out of hardship. A welfare system that is sustainable, fair and focused on need will always do more to empower Australians than one built on division or ideology. Governments don't create wealth; businesses do. When my father lost his job shortly after arriving in Australia, he sought to rebuild by starting an electrical business much like the one he had successfully run overseas. Yet, when he approached a government department for advice, he was told that assistance would only be available if he first went on welfare. That experience speaks volumes about a system that too often disincentivises initiative. If we are serious about national prosperity, we must do more to encourage enterprise, not hinder it. It is the resilience of small business that underpins our economic strength and employment opportunities. But Australia is now losing too many of them to countries with more favourable economic conditions. This quiet exodus of ambition and ability cannot continue. If we are to grow our economy and secure our future, we must foster a climate that rewards effort, investment and innovation. That means undertaking a serious internal review of our tax system and industrial relations policies, ensuring they're competitive and encourage productivity. As the youngest member of the federal coalition, I am acutely aware that I am viewed as a representative of my generation. And, as a millennial, I cannot in good conscience avoid the issue of our national debt. When I look at the way government has treated the national accounts, it leaves me with deep concerns about the message we are sending and the culture we're creating. We have created a culture of expedience—one that justifies present comfort at the expense of future Australians—and we act as though we bear no responsibility for the weight of this burden on generations to come. This approach cannot be sustained. It underpins the ongoing degradation of personal responsibility and retires the obligation to leave things better than we found them. We can spend our time assigning blame and pointing fingers at different governments or we can acknowledge that this is a fresh parliament and, with it, a fresh opportunity—an opportunity to restore strong fiscal management where government practises the same self-control that we expect of the people we govern. We must ensure Australia remains an attractive and competitive destination for investment, because investment means jobs, innovation and national prosperity. To achieve this, we must commit to reducing the burden of unnecessary regulation and red tape that too often stifles opportunity before it begins. As a foreign investment lawyer, I have seen firsthand how Australia is fast becoming a less attractive investment destination. Investors are deterred not by our values or by our people but by a system weighed down by complexity, delay and uncertainty. If we are to secure long-term economic growth, we must restore confidence by creating an environment that rewards enterprise and welcomes investment that is in the national interest. As an island nation, our geography has long served us as a strategic advantage, but in the decades ahead, our location at the heart of an increasingly volatile Indo-Pacific region will present complex and testing challenges. It is already clear that these challenges are emerging not only in a military context but also through persistent and covert attempts to weaken our values and fracture our unity. Meeting them will require foresight, resolve and deliberate strategic planning. The men and women of the Australian Defence Force represent the height of our national character, but admiration alone is not enough. We must be honest about the resourcing constraints they face and respond accordingly. Australia must invest in building a strong, sovereign defence capability—one that's equipped, modern and ready to defend our national interest. But national interest begins not just with hardware but with heart. This is why it's so important that young Australians grow up with a sense of pride in their country, because a generation that understands what is worth defending will be prepared to stand for it. In a time of growing uncertainty in the international order, we should seize the strategic and diplomatic advantages of our trusted allies and, importantly, our membership of the Commonwealth. The defence of our nation is not limited to military defence; it's also defence of our interests. I am a firm believer in diversifying our import and export markets so we don't rely on any one country and expose ourselves to being held ransom by adversaries. Australia must support the expansion of our domestic manufacturing sector in line with our strategic and comparative advantage. Housing must not be understood simply as a challenge of the moment but as a generational issue that demands a generational solution. Yes, we must urgently increase supply and deregulate the building industry, but we cannot stop there. We need to pursue a bold, long-term vision for Australia's future—one that thinks beyond the next election cycle and asks what this country should look like in 2100. My city of the Gold Coast remains the only new sizeable built city that was built since the Second World War in Australia. That fact alone should prompt serious national reflection. We must be prepared to plan and build new cities, invest in infrastructure that improves national connectivity and create the conditions for growth, including tax settings that attract long-term capital and drive investment. This is not just about housing affordability; it's about ambition. Too many Australians feel they must leave our cities or our shores to realise their potential. Our task is to make sure they don't have to. I'm very aware of the distinguished political lineage of my seat. In his maiden speech, the first member for McPherson and former Australian prime minister Sir Arthur Fadden remarked: We should be cautious in our decisions, because upon them the final outcome may depend—the making or unmaking of Australia as a nation. So I say to my parliamentary colleagues, particularly those in my party at a time of national rebuild, let's be bold; let's be visionary. Let's bring forth our very own era of national renewal, anchored in the issues that matter to those we represent. We walk in the footsteps of the generation that saved the world—men and women who fought, served and sacrificed for the freedoms we now inherit. As Sir Paul Hasluck reminded us, we must 'make the most of the chance of politics'. That chance is now ours, and we must meet it with conviction, clarity and courage. My journey to this chamber would not have been possible without the unwavering support of my campaign family, many of whom are in the gallery tonight and watching from around the world. I am profoundly grateful and forever indebted. We truly were a grassroots movement on the Gold Coast, and I thank every volunteer and supporter for their tireless dedication to our cause and to me personally. It is a truly humbling experience to see the support that each person gave me. I thank the Liberal National Party of Queensland and its members for electing me as their candidate for the seat of McPherson, my campaign committee and my parliamentary colleagues, particularly those who visited me during the campaign. I thank those who contributed to my journey, many of whom join us here today. To my former colleagues, from my early days as a parliamentary attendant and from my time at King & Wood Mallesons and those that I had the privilege of working with in this building, including under the guidance of my now colleague the member for Fisher and former foreign minister the Hon. Julie Bishop: thank you all for your mentorship and friendship. I thank my teachers and lecturers, whose influence has stayed with me beyond the classroom, and my broader family and friends for their love and support. I thank my staff. I hope this role will inspire us to perform at our very best, always keeping in mind that our foremost duty is to serve our community and our country in all that we do. As the great president Bartlet asked in The West Wing: Do you have a friend? Are they your best friend? Are they smarter than you? And would you trust them with your life? Because that's your chief counsel. I'm fortunate to have a few chief counsel—Trent Belling, Troy Maloney and Jarrod Lomas—all here today. Trent, for your sharp political mind, sense of humour and for backing me every step of the way; Troy, for your warm friendship and your loyalty; and Jarrod, for being a sounding board that keeps me grounded whether or not I like it: thank you. I wish to make a special acknowledgement of my mentor, the Hon. Dr Brett Mason. As a distinguished former prime minister once said, 'You win the lottery of life when you're born in Australia.' I'm grateful for having won two lotteries in life: being born to this great nation and being born to my parents. To my mum and to my dad, who are here today: thank you for everything. My story is the Gold Coast story, and the Gold Coast story is the Australian story—people who have made something from nothing. McPherson is a microcosm of what we need to see more of—people who are willing to take risks, back their ingenuity, contribute to their local community and create a life limited only by their own imagination. It's a uniquely entrepreneurial city that was built on small business and innovation. Tradies, professionals, small-business owners and digital nomads who can work anywhere in the world choose McPherson as a base because it offers them a unique lifestyle and an unmatched natural environment to live, work and raise a family. Their belief in themselves and their willingness to stand on their own two feet are the modern representation of the Australian spirit we need to capture. So it is only right that my final thanks go to the people of McPherson, without whom nothing here would be possible and everything here would be pointless. For placing their trust and their hopes in me, I will never take the southern Gold Coast for granted, and each day I will work with determination to ensure your voice is heard in our national parliament. It is the greatest honour of my life to be elected as the federal member of McPherson. I am the 1,268th person to be elected to this chamber since Federation. I love this country with every fibre of my being. I love it for what it has given my family, for the values it holds dear and for the promise it still carries in the hearts of the quiet Australians. Australia is not just a place on a map; it's an idea, a spirit and a shared story. Though we face great challenges ahead, I have never been more confident in the capacity of our people. The task before us is not to manage decline but to shape destiny and to invest in a future where effort is rewarded, freedom is protected and opportunity is not the privilege of the few but the inheritance of all. With conviction, gratitude and hope, I stand here ready to do my part. I thank the House. Debate adjourned. BILLS 92 BILLS Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025 92

Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025

Report from Federation Chamber 92 Third Reading 92 18:16 Dr MULINO 132880 Fraser by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE 92 STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE Moscow Olympic Games: Australian Team 92 Reference to Federation Chamber 92 18:17 Ms WHITE 224102 Lyons I move: That further statements on indulgence on the Moscow 1980 Olympics be permitted in the Federation Chamber. Question agreed to. BILLS 92 BILLS Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Penalty and Overtime Rates) Bill 2025 92

Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Penalty and Overtime Rates) Bill 2025

Second Reading 92 18:18 Ms LAWRENCE 299150 Hasluck Protecting the integrity of the modern award system ensuring workers are properly compensated is at the core of the Labor Party and the labour movement. Young workers in my electorate of Hasluck, like Patrick Hunt, deserve their penalty rates. Patrick is a proud member of the SDA. In fact, he just celebrated his 17th birthday last week, so he's still on a youth wage. Without his penalty rates, he would see substantially less of his wages. As Patrick's mum said: Penalty rates make working weekends worth it for Patrick. It makes time away from family, long hours, late nights worth it. We want people like Patrick to continue to receive the wages that he does in order to be able to serve us. Penalty rates are not a luxury; they are recognition of the unsociable hours that hundreds of thousands of Australians, just like Patrick, are doing all around the country, be it in retail, in fast food, in pharmacies and in so many other sectors. They reflect the sacrifice of the weekends, the public holidays, the family time. For many workers, especially those on modest incomes, they are the difference between making ends meet and falling behind. For many of my local volunteers, people like John Topliss, 'penalty wages mean the world'; those are John's words. John had worked in Midland Gate, just across from my office, and he had relied on those penalty rates he's received. When we made our election commitment on this issue, John told me that it means everything to him to have a local member who stands up for his rights at work. His penalty rates provided the security that got him through university and have provided him with the means to start full-time work with some savings in his pocket. Another volunteer, Lucinda Bartlett, said, in her own words, that her dad and her granddad were also able to work through university because of penalty rates: The sanctity of my study is preserved by law, protecting penalty rates from an opposition unfamiliar with the work study balance of modern young people. As a full time student, studying 40 hours plus attending class and working 20 hours a week, penalty rates are not a luxury but what allowed me to attend class. This move is not to protect against a theoretical harm; there is a very real threat to workers' wages from big corporations and those opposite me in this chamber. The Australian Retailers Association and other big business organisations are at the Fair Work Commission seeking to have penalty rates scrapped for some workers in the retail sector. I extend a thank you to the SDA national secretary, Gerard Dwyer, for his work in this matter. Modelling by the SDA found that a typical retail worker working afternoon and evening shifts and working every second weekend would be more than $5,000 worse off under the Australian Retail Association's proposal. The SDA said: The ARA and big business call this workplace 'flexibility'. We call this greed. I couldn't agree more. There is opposition to this bill, yet I believe that those opposite may find some issues in their own position. One of the issues that members of the Liberal and National parties have to deal with—and they have a few issues that they need to deal with—is their adulation for aspects of the governance of the USA that simply aren't working. Health care is one. How many members of the opposition would be happy to scrap Medicare and the PBS, to follow the broken American system? There aren't penalty rates in the USA. There's overtime if you've already worked a 48-hour week, but no mandated dispensation for working nights, holidays or weekends—unless you're counting tips. 'Land of the free', 'the freedom to choose'—we often hear that from members opposite. But, as usual, it's freedom you only get to enjoy if you can afford to pay for it. The member for Goldstein pretends this legislation might mean workers are paid less. Our government has presided over real wage rises and over tax cuts for all workers. The coalition government of which the member for Goldstein was a part—perhaps he's forgotten—saw real wages go backwards over their nine-plus years in office. As the shadow minister for industrial relations and employment, he's criticised this bill—which is not a shock to anyone. He does not believe in protecting workers' wages and upholding the award safety net. The now opposition leader, Sussan Ley, voted in favour of removing Sunday and public holiday penalty rates when she voted on the Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Vulnerable Workers) Bill 2017. The opposition leader isn't really sure where to stand when there's a flag in the room but she has absolutely no doubt about looking at the flag at the top of the building, to see which way the wind is blowing. We on this side want to protect the safety nets we have in place. We want to protect workers' rights and their families. We don't want our hospitality workers working all night for drinks and just tips. This legislation protects penalty rates. It doesn't extend them but it ensures that they can't be given away under undue pressure. The legislation doesn't hold good businesses back but it does ensure that there are no workers left behind. The Independent Education Union, which represents teachers and support staff in independent schools, has welcomed this legislation. The Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation said that they welcome the protection of penalty rates for insecure and casual work. The ACTU has stated: Our Government is finally stepping in to stop employers cutting penalty rates and protecting people's pay. This was a key election promise, and we thank the Albanese Government for making it one of their first priorities. We call on all political parties to respect the election's outcome and pass this law. The member for Goldstein has stated that the coalition supports penalty rates. It's a meaningless statement if you're not prepared to vote to protect them. For us, it's a high-level principle, and that's what we're enshrining in this legislation. Due to the composition of the workforce, this legislation will particularly assist those workers who are women, part-time or casual workers and especially those under the age of 35, like Patrick. The Australian Business Journal stated last week: For many Australians, especially those in hospitality, retail, health, and transport, penalty rates make a significant difference to their weekly earnings. The government's move to protect penalty overtime rates aims to offer certainty for these workers, ensuring they are not disadvantaged by any award changes or enterprise agreements. It also sends a strong signal that the safety net for vulnerable workers cannot be eroded through backdoor mechanisms that leave employees worse off financially. Essential research polling suggests that 70 per cent of Australians see protecting penalty rates as a critical workplace issue. This demonstrates the support for this legislation felt around the country. We all know someone who benefits from their penalty rates. It may be a family member, friend or worker at the local store. Many of these workers rely on their penalty rates to actually get by. They rely on the penalty rates to pay their bills, their fuel, their rent and their child care or to get through their studies. They deserve to have those wages protected, and the Albanese Labor government is committed to doing just that. In our first term, the Labor government gave workers the right to disconnect. The Albanese Labor government ended the forced permanent casual loophole, providing a proper pathway to conversions for casuals who want it. The Albanese Labor government criminalised intentional wage theft, and now the Albanese Labor government is protecting the penalty rates of Australian workers. Defending workers rights is the blood of the Labor Party. For as long as there is an opposition that threatens workers' rights, there is the Labor party, protecting Australian workers' rights and their wages. I commend the bill. 18:27 Ms CHANEY 300006 Curtin I rise today to speak against the Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Penalty and Overtime Rates) Bill 2025, which was introduced yesterday and is being debated today. You may ask how I've managed to get to an informed position on this legislation in 24 hours. It would be a reasonable question. Turning legislation around in 24 hours does not give members of the House an opportunity to hear from all stakeholder groups, consider the impacts and really understand the outcomes of new laws. I've done my best, but this is not the path to passing the best legislation. I'm surprised that this is not being referred to a committee. I abstained from the member for Goldstein's motion to refer this to a committee, because the committee he referred it to doesn't exist, so it was not a practical suggestion. But I would like to see greater scrutiny on these changes. Let me be clear. I support fair pay and decent working conditions. Penalty and overtime rates are a vital part of our industrial relations framework, especially for those working unsociable hours. But, based on the limited time I've had to review this bill, I have formed the view that this bill is not the right way to protect them. This bill introduces provisions to prevent a reduction in specified penalty or overtime rates in modern awards, preventing provisions in modern awards that allow employers to roll up penalty and overtime rates into a single pay rate if it will result in a reduction in remuneration for any employee. We have one of the most complicated workplace relations systems in the world. For businesses of all sizes, but especially small businesses, which are the powerhouse of our economy, navigating our workplace relations system is a huge headache and a drag on business growth. It's not conducive to dynamic businesses. There's been no political impetus to reform the industrial relations framework so it becomes more functional. We've seen, over the years, that ideological overhaul wins out over pragmatic iteration. In such a complex regulatory environment, the main winners are the specialists—lawyers, unions and IR professionals, who'll have a steady stream of work ahead of them. Neither businesses nor workers benefit from complexity. Efforts have been made to rationalise the number of awards in recent years, but each award is still ridiculously complicated. No doubt there are egregious breaches of award conditions, but there are also lots of examples of awards being so complicated that employers, especially small businesses, inadvertently underpay staff, need to engage specialists to determine whether they are paying correctly or both. Even large companies with significant human resources teams frequently find they've breached some unknown or complicated term of an award. Quite aside from the complexity issue, it appears this legislation represents a troubling overreach. The Fair Work Commission, the independent expert body established precisely to adjudicate these types of matters, is currently considering a case brought by retailers seeking to vary penalty rates for managerial positions in exchange for increased pay. That process should be allowed to run its course. Instead, we see the government pre-empting the commission's decision with legislation that undermines its independence. This is not the first time we've seen this pattern. When governments legislate to override or anticipate decisions from independent institutions, it erodes trusts in those bodies and politicises what should be impartial processes. Unions have raised concerns that this case may be the thin end of the wedge—the beginning of a broader campaign to dismantle penalty rates. But the solution is not to bypass the commission with politically motivated legislation. We must protect workers, but we also must protect the integrity of our institutions. If we continue to legislate around the commission every time we disagree with a potential outcome, industrial relations becomes even more of a political football. On the substance of the changes, requiring that additional remuneration cannot be reduced for any employee is an unreasonably high bar. One example of an employee who may be disadvantaged could bring down a commonsense simplification to rates. This echoes the attempts to make the Better Off Overall Test a bit more practical, which ultimately couldn't do much because of these hypothetical situations. It's also not clear how these new provisions would interact with any variation to other modern award provisions that affect when the rate is triggered. In short, there are complexities here, and they deserve to be investigated rather than having the bill rushed through the day after it's introduced to override a potential Fair Work Commission decision. In the context of an already far-too-complicated industrial relations framework, this is just more complexity. For these reasons, I cannot support the bill. I urge the government to respect the independence of the Fair Work Commission and allow it to do the job it was created to do. 18:32 Ms CLAYDON 248181 Newcastle Deputy Speaker, this is the first opportunity I've had to congratulate you in your magnificent role as Deputy Speaker in the chair. I do wish to rise this evening to speak in strong support—unlike the member we just heard from—of the Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Penalty and Overtime Rates) Bill 2025, which aims to protect penalty and overtime rates for Australian workers. This bill was introduced by my good friend and colleague the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations, a woman who has undertaken extensive consultation. Some might say we had an entire election fought on some of these issues. Millions of Australians got to have their say. This bill is a bill that goes to the heart of what Labor believes: fairness, dignity and respect for working people. It's a bill that honours the shift workers, weekend workers, early risers and late finishers—the people who work while others rest, who clock in at 4 am to bake the bread or sign off at 3 am after a long night working behind the bar. It's for the workers who spend Christmas Eves stocking shelves and Easter Sundays changing hospital beds. For too long, these Australians have been told their sacrifice doesn't matter—that their time isn't worth more than a Monday-to-Friday nine-to-five. This bill says the opposite. It says that your time does matter, and so does your pay. This legislation delivers on a key Labor election commitment to protect the penalty rates of around 2.6 million modern-award-reliant workers. It amends the Fair Work Act 2009 to legislate protections that ensure that penalty rates and overtime payments in modern awards cannot be reduced or substituted by any other term that would lower a worker's take-home pay. It's a simple principle, really. Workers should not have their rights eroded under the guise of efficiency or flexibility—not when that flexibility only ever seems to benefit one side, and it's not the worker. Right now, there are active applications before the Fair Work Commission in sectors like retail, banking and clerical work, industries where workers are already underpaid and undervalued are seeking to trade away penalty rates. That's why this bill is so urgent. It speaks to the issues the member for Curtin raised. This is why this urgent bill needs to be before the House now. We want these changes passed and enacted so the commission can apply the new law to those cases immediately, stopping the erosion of pay before the damage is done. Penalty rates and overtime are not perks. They are not bonuses or benefits to be bargained away. They are recognition of the time that workers spend away from their families, their friends and their communities, working nights, weekends, early mornings and holidays. They are compensation for working nights, when everyone else is asleep, for showing up on Sunday when others are resting or for saying yes to shifts on Christmas Day, New Year's Eve or school holidays, when, honestly, you'd rather be with your kids. When a nurse does a double shift and misses bedtime with her children, that deserves recognition. When a warehouse worker clocks out at 2 am and makes the long commute home, that deserves recognition. When a barista opens up a cafe every weekend while studying full time during the week, that deserves recognition. These are hardworking Australians who keep the country running. They deserve a system that fairly compensates them for this work. Penalty rates recognise that sacrifice. They say: 'Your time matters. Your labour matters, and it's worth more when it costs more.' That's why this legislation matters—because, in recent years, we have seen exactly what happens when workers don't have the protection of government behind them. The Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Penalty and Overtime Rates) Bill 2025 ensures that penalty rates and overtime cannot be undermined or bargained away as part of enterprise agreements. This bill is designed to be simple, flexible and workable, providing clarity without adding unnecessary complexity. It makes clear that the safety net of minimum conditions under the award system is just that—it's a floor and not a ceiling. The bill strengthens the role of the Fair Work Commission, upholds the principle of no disadvantage and stops the erosion of hard-earned conditions under the guise of flexibility or cost cutting. It closes the loopholes, it restores balance and it sends a clear message: workers rights are not negotiable. In my community of Newcastle this bill will make a real and immediate difference. Newcastle is a city built on the backs of shift workers. We are home to thousands of nurses, paramedics, aged-care workers, cleaners, hospitality workers, retail workers, transport drivers and security guards—people who don't work standard hours but work odd hours, long hours and hard hours. This bill means that those workers can have certainty that their penalty rates can't be stripped out through enterprise bargaining and their overtime pay won't be sold off for a flat rate or a 'take it or leave it' deal. That matters because, in Newcastle and in so many communities across Australia, every dollar counts. Penalty rates are not an extra; they're not an add-on luxury item. Some members struggle to understand this concept, I think. They are part of essential recognition of long and often very family-unfriendly hours worked and served. They pay the bills; they cover the school uniforms; they keep the fridge full. I've had many conversations with workers in Newcastle who've told me that the penalty rates they earn make the difference between just scraping by and actually getting ahead. For single parents, carers, casuals and part-time workers, penalty rates are a lifeline, and for too long they have been under attack. Let's be very clear about how we got here. Penalty rates were cut under the former coalition government. They allowed it to happen; indeed, they defended it. They said it would help business. They said it would create jobs. They said the impact would be minimal. But, for the retail workers who had to cancel their kids' birthday parties, it wasn't minimal. For the student who had to take on an extra shift instead of studying for an exam, it wasn't minimal. For the aged-care worker who watched their pay shrink while costs kept rising, it wasn't minimal. Labor opposed these cuts from day one. We stood with workers. We fought alongside their unions. I want to give a very special shout-out to Hunter Workers, who are at the forefront of defending workers rights each and every day. It's hard work, but it's noble work. We stood with everyday Australians who knew that a pay cut, no matter how it was packaged up by those opposite, was a blow to both dignity and fairness. The Liberals never believed in strong workplace protections. They don't support collective bargaining. They don't support a robust awards system. They don't support workers having a real say. We know those opposite won't lift a finger to protect workers entitlements. The former leader of the opposition confirmed it when he said, 'The independent umpire sets the conditions,' and affirmed, 'We don't propose any departure from the current arrangements.' Of course, we have seen the shadow minister come out criticising these laws as well. In contrast, Labor has always fought for a fair day's pay for a fair day's work. It's part of the founding principles of our party. We brought you the Fair Work Act, we introduced universal superannuation, we created paid parental leave, we criminalised wage theft, we banned pay secrecy clauses, we legislated 'same job, same pay' laws to stop the labour hire exploitation, we gave workers the right to clock off and, now, we're acting again to protect penalty and overtime rates, because, when Labor is in government, working people are never on their own. Let me highlight exactly who does benefit from this bill: women, who make up the majority of the part-time and casual workforce and the majority of those in the care sector, the cleaning sector and the retail sector, who dominate sectors like aged care, cleaning, hospitality and retail, and who are more likely to be working irregular hours and relying on penalty rates to top up otherwise modest pay packets; young people, many of whom began their working lives in shift based industries like fast food, retail and customer service and are more vulnerable to unfair agreements and pay erosion; migrant workers, who are disproportionately represented in award-dependent, shift based jobs and are more likely to be unfamiliar with workplace laws or less empowered to bargain; and low-paid workers, who do not have the leverage to say no to a bad deal and who rely on the award safety net to ensure fairness. This bill is a gender equity measure, it's an antipoverty measure, it's a youth justice measure and it's a multicultural equity measure too. It is everything a good government should be. We use the levers of the law to protect those most at risk of being left behind. This bill doesn't just fix the past; it futureproofs the system. We know the nature of work is changing faster than ever. The rise of gig work, the growth of casualisation, the increasing influence of AI and automation—these are big forces reshaping our economy. But no matter how work changes, some principles must remain constant. Workplaces must be safe, they must offer fair payment and fair remuneration for work done, and they must be places where people are not exploited. This legislation says clearly that the Fair Work Act is a living document. It must adapt as the workforce evolves, and, as a parliament, we must be responsive to the needs of the people we represent. We are reinforcing the role of the Fair Work Commission. We are raising the floor for workers, not just for now but for the future. We are rebuilding public trust in a system that puts people before profit. For many modern-award-reliant employees, penalty rates and overtime are not optional extras. They are a critical part of their take-home pay, and this bill continues the Albanese Labor government's commitment to deliver fair and decent conditions for working Australians. It delivers on our government's key election commitment to protect the penalty rates of around 2.6 million modern-award-reliant workers. However, this bill is about more than money. It's about dignity and security. It's about saying to workers in Newcastle and, indeed, in every single electorate represented in this chamber, that their time matters. Their effort matters and their sacrifice matters. Most of all, your government sees that effort and sacrifice. This is what Labor governments do. We stand up for workers, legislate for fairness and deliver for working people. I commend this bill to the House. Let's protect penalty rates, let's protect overtime and let's keep building a country where no worker is left behind and every worker gets to have a fair go. 18:47 Ms SPENDER 286042 Wentworth I rise to speak on the Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Penalty and Overtime Rates) Bill 2025. Penalty and overtime rates are a really important part of our employment system and were, in many cases, fought hard for over the course of Australia's history. In my electorate, I have St Vincent's hospital, one area of the community where I often meet amazing shift workers who give up their weekends, their nights and their public holidays so that the rest of our community are safe and have help when we need them. Shift work is hard enough, but additionally these essential workers have to give up precious time they could otherwise be spending with friends, with family and out in the community. To them, penalty and overtime rates are crucial, and I recognise that. It is with those people in mind that I considered this bill. This bill seeks to amend the Fair Work Act to insert a new section requiring the Fair Work Commission to ensure that, in making or varying modern awards, penalty rates are not reduced and that new or varied awards will not include terms that substitute penalty rates or overtime entitlements which reduce additional remuneration from penalty or overtime rates. Now, no-one disputes the fact that people who work those shifts and those hours should receive fair compensation for doing so. I think it is disingenuous to characterise any questions on this bill in that way, but I do have serious reservations about the bill—principally, that it undermines the role of our independent Fair Work Commission, who we've entrusted to take politics out of such decisions. It will prevent reasonable options and menus in awards and, in some cases, hold back an overwhelming majority of workers from accepting better outcomes, and it adds additional complexity to our already complex award system. None of these objections seek to undermine the ability of workers to receive compensation for their tireless work, particularly those that work in unsociable hours. My principal concern with this bill is the deliberate interference with the Fair Work Commission's powers to adjudicate such matters. I think it's really critical to identify that the protections this bill seeks to insert are already explicitly stated in the bill under section 134(1) of the Fair Work Act. These protections exist. This section states that, under the objectives of modern awards, they must consider the need to provide additional remuneration for employees working: overtime; unsociable, irregular or unpredictable hours; weekends or public holidays; and shifts. That is already enshrined in the current Fair Work Act, and the Fair Work Commission has to work under those objectives. In other words, the Fair Work Commission is already instructed by the act to consider the provisions the bill seeks to protect. Legislating an additional proposed section 135A represents a lack of faith in the independent Fair Work Commission to adjudicate this matter fairly on the guidance that already exists. This brings me to my next concern. This bill is in direct response to a current application from one sector to the Fair Work Commission to have an adjustment to the award to allow workers to opt in to a higher, yet stable, salary over a lower base rate reliant on penalty rates. This bill is seeking to prevent workers having a choice about whether they get the current arrangements or whether they accept a different arrangement which they would prefer. I do understand that for some people the concern is that this just represents the thin end of the wedge and that, if we introduce a reasonably acceptable change, this will be start of the slippery slope to gradual degradation of penalty rates. I have heard that argument. But, respectfully, I disagree. I think that this shows an unreasonable lack of faith in the Fair Work Commission and an unreasonable lack of respect for individuals' right to choose what options suit them best. As I mentioned before, section 134(1) of the Fair Work Act already gives the Fair Work Commission the responsibility to adjudicate on these matters. We want an industrial relations system that accommodates different circumstances and affords workers choice but pushes back when compromises go too far. I believe the current system strikes the appropriate balance, and I believe the bill undermines this important principle. It is entirely reasonable that some workers may want to choose a stable salary over relying on penalty rates, for example. The reasons for this might be as simple as wanting to be able to make applications for credit easier or making it simpler for them to save and budget their weekly wage. Allowing workers the option is exactly what our workplace system, I believe, should have more of rather than less of. In fact, the Productivity Commission's 2023 report Advancingprosperity, explicitly recommended 'introducing menus into industrial rewards' in recommendation 7.14. The additional concern I have on this bill is the bar under which this could be judged—if a single worker would be worse off under a different penalty rate arrangement then it would not be possible for it to be offered. Again, I think we need to think of context. If the vast majority—and I am talking about the vast, vast majority—of workers are better off under a different arrangement but a very small handful would be worse off under that arrangement, in whose interest is it for that not to be at least offered as an option for people? That is the question I really am asking as the government puts forward this bill. Finally, my final concern with the bill is simplicity. I understand that awards are simpler than they have been in the past. I have employed many people under awards and I have sat with family members and friends trying to work out what they should be paid, and I can I tell you that we have a long way to go to make awards simple for businesses to make sure they are doing the right thing and simple for people to make sure they're being paid correctly. This change, while modest, adds to the complexity and makes it harder for people trying to do the right thing to make sure they are doing the right thing or they are being paid the right amount. It also makes it potentially more complex to engage with and enter into designing enterprise bargaining arrangements, which I know is a key desire, frankly, of the Labor government and of many employers. This brings me to my second reading amendment. The government has shown today how easy it is to open the Fair Work Act and legislate provisions to, in the minister's words, 'get wages moving for Australian workers'. Well I ask them, while we're at it, to please consider recommendation 7.14 of the Productivity Commission's report entitled Advancing prosperity, which I referred to earlier. It argued for 'explicitly enshrining productivity as an objective of modern awards'. 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: (1) notes: (a) Australia has just had the worst decade for productivity in the past 60 years; (b) boosting productivity is the only way Australia can sustainably increase wages over time; (c) the Government's agenda to lift Australia's productivity is not comprehensive without considering the role of Australia's industrial relations system; and (d) in 2023, the Productivity Commission's report Advancing Prosperity recommended that the Fair Work Act be amended to explicitly include productivity as an objective of modern awards; and (2) calls on the Government to amend subsection 134(1) of the Fair Work Act such that Productivity is an objective of modern awards, as per Recommendation 7.13 of the Productivity Commission's report Advancing Prosperity". We all know that productivity is the only way we can get a sustainable lift in wages over the long-term. In fact, the Intergenerational report suggests that it has represented around 80 per cent of real wage growth since the 1980s. If we don't lift our sluggish productivity levels all of our wages go backwards. All this negotiating, all this fighting over the pie means so much less if the pie isn't growing. How do we grow that pie? We have to grow productivity. You might not notice it, you might not feel the benefit of productivity, but as Ken Henry outlined in his recent Press Club speech, 'The average full-time Australian worker has been robbed of around $500,000 over the past 25 years,' because of our failure to lift sluggish productivity. I know industrial relations and tax reform are no panacea for productivity. No single action is a panacea for productivity, but we cannot pretend to have a comprehensive discussion about how to lift our lacklustre productivity without acknowledging that there are balances to be struck and, frankly, we need a better evidence base to assess whether changes to the industrial relations acts make a difference, make a negative or positive difference, to productivity and the cost or the benefit that that imposes on the community. While I'm talking about this, I have been urging the government for some time to ask the Productivity Commission to specifically look at industrial relations through a productivity lens. If we could look at our system, not through a political lens but through a productivity lens—a lens of just understanding how the system works, how it doesn't work and then better understand our choices and our trade-offs when we choose to make them—then we do have a better chance of making all workers better off, which is certainly my objective in coming into this House. The simplistic message the government is espousing is that anyone who opposes this bill must want to slash wages. That is an unfair argument and it is not worthy of what is actually a really important debate. It just demonstrates how politicised IR has become. I don't want to see industrial relations be an ideological battle between the major parties to the extent that it is virtually impossible to have the sensible debate around IR that we need. It is for that very reason that we determined to have a Fair Work Commission in the first place, an arm's length organisation that can take the politics out of these sorts of decisions, because industrial relations are too important to squabble over for political games. So, I come back to the workers I spoke about at the very start. I will be honest with all those people in my community who do rely on penalty rates and overtime rates. If I believed that this bill was critical to protecting you getting what you deserve, in terms of those penalty and overtime rates, then I would be voting for this bill. But I'm not because I don't believe it is critical. I believe it is already enshrined in the Fair Work Act, and that it actually removes choice for workers, which is important, and also makes our industrial relations system more complex, which has a burden that is hard to quantify but is significantly there. I believe that if we are serious about boosting productivity then we need to be absolutely rigorous in scrutinising every piece of legislation that comes through this House and viewing it through a productivity lens as well as all the lenses of the other issues that this piece of legislation is trying to address. The DEPUTY SPEAKER F2S Is the amendment seconded? Ms Boele 26417 I second the amendment and I reserve my right to speak. The DEPUTY SPEAKER F2S The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this the honourable member for Wentworth has moved as an amendment that all words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. The question now is that the amendment be agreed to. 18:59 Mr GEORGANAS DZY Adelaide I'm very proud to be here speaking on this bill, the Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Penalty and Overtime Rates) Bill 2025, which protects workers' penalty rates. I do so because it's an important bill for my electorate, especially, and for everyone's electorate as it amends the Fair Work Act 2009 to legislate protections to ensure that penalty and overtime rates in modern awards cannot be reduced or substituted by another term that would reduce employees' take-home pay. Our workers, who rely on overtime and penalty rates, deserve nothing less. That's why I'm supporting this bill and why all of us on this side are supporting the bill. In the electorate of Adelaide there are approximately 8,925 people employed in the retail industry and 6,328 employed in construction industries. There are workers in many other industries who work overtime or who work on weekends or after hours within my electorate. Every single one of those workers deserves to have their penalty rates and overtime rates protected, and that's exactly what this government bill is doing. With the CBD at the centre of the seat of Adelaide, we have the state's major department stores within the geographical boundary. We have workers in the retail and the hospitality industries, in cafes and pubs. We have shift workers in the hospitals that are based in my electorate. We have people who work after hours. We have part-time workers and many university students who rely on these penalty rates, when they work on the weekends, to meet the cost of living; we hear about the hardships that are taking place at the moment. It's very important that, as a government, we do everything to protect workers and to protect their penalty rates and overtime rates when they work. Let's just think about it. Many of us go out to a restaurant to eat on Mother's Day, on Father's Day, on Sundays and even on Christmas Day. We enjoy the day with our families—with our kids and our grandkids—yet there are workers there to serve us and make sure that we enjoy that day. Think about it. They've given up their family time, their public holiday, their Sunday or the special time that they have with their family because they work shifts throughout the week just to serve the public. They deserve their penalty rates, and they deserve to be paid according to the overtime rates. No-one should have to give that up. That's why this bill is so important. Think of industrial relations and the many bills that have come before this place. There's a regular pattern that takes place in things like, for example, WorkChoices. It was the other side that brought that in, that looked at downgrading these rates, at eating into those extras that existed for workers because they gave up their free time or worked extra hours et cetera. When we first formed government we were the side, the Labor side, that actually lobbied for the commission to give an extra pay rise to the lowest paid workers in the country. Yet the other side said it wasn't up to us or governments to do that. We know that workers are better off under Labor governments. That is historically a fact. If you look back at the history, since the party was established in 1891, you'll see that workers have been better off every time a Labor government has been formed. And there's no better time than now for a Labor government, with the cost-of-living pressures, because all of this assists and helps those people who are struggling and doing it tough. It's so important. Penalty rates have been in Australia for many years, in Queensland from when the Labor Party was formed in 1891 and then gradually in the other states; that's well over 100 years. This was the bread and butter of our political party. We were formed for this reason. We were formed to govern, of course, but a major part of our scope was to ensure that workers' rights were protected, that workers were given dignity and that workers could actually get paid so that they could afford to live, to put bread and butter on the table, to dress their kids, to send them to school and to do all the things that give dignity to human beings. As I said, penalty rates have been around for many, many years, but it wasn't until 1947, when there was a ruling by the Court of Conciliation and Arbitration, that penalty rates were effectively established and standardised for millions of Australians who relied on penalty rates to keep their heads above water. I recall clearly when my parents were working. They were both working. My mother worked at the Royal Adelaide Hospital as a domestic, as a cleaner and in the kitchen. In those days, she worked shift work. My father worked at General Motors-Holden. I remember him waiting to hear if he was going to work on the Saturday, which was overtime for him—an extra eight hours that was paid in those days at time and a half, I think—which made all the difference for our family. I remember the conversations around the kitchen table when, occasionally, he'd be despondent because he wasn't given overtime on that particular Saturday. You've got to remember that this was in the sixties, when motor vehicles were pouring off the production line nonstop and people had to keep up with the sale of those cars, so many factory workers were actually working on Saturdays. I recall it very well. Had there been no penalty rates, it could have been a very different story for my family. I don't know, and we'll never know. The case is exactly the same today for all those people that I mentioned when I started talking—part-time workers, a lot of women in retail, people in the hospitality industry and university students who keep their heads above water by being able to work on Saturday nights, Sundays et cetera. So it's very, very important. There's been a sustained effort from certain employers to combine penalty and overtime rates into one single rate of pay. This obviously—it's not rocket science—would leave some of those workers worse off, and we don't want that situation. We don't want workers to be worse off and to have less pay, and that's what this bill prevents. It gives certainty and a guarantee that they won't, so I can't see why anyone would be opposing a bill that will guarantee some of our lowest paid workers the benefit of being able to keep their heads above water through penalty rates. It is something that, as we heard the member for Newcastle say earlier, gives dignity to those people. If we can't give dignity to those people, why are we here? If we can't give dignity to people who earn the least amount of money of anyone in the country and who are doing it tough to keep their heads above water, to keep the fridges full at home and to keep their kids at school, then we have to really think about why we're here, because it's for those people that these safety nets, like penalty rates, have been put up so we can protect them. These are hardworking Australians who keep the country going and running on weekends, public holidays and late nights through many, many shift hours et cetera—shift work. They deserve a system that fairly compensates them for this work. Relative to all employees, award-reliant employees are more likely to be women under the age of 35 who work part time and are employed on a casual basis. The bill adds this new section to the act to establish a clear principle that, when exercising its powers to make, vary or revoke modern awards, the Fair Work Commission must ensure that the specified penalty or overtime rates are not reduced and that modern awards do not include terms that are substitutes for employees' entitlements to receive penalty or overtime rates where those terms would have the effect of reducing the additional remuneration any employee would otherwise receive. The bill will commence, of course, the day after it receives royal assent, reflecting this government's election commitment to move quickly to protect something that is a necessity for low-paid workers and shift workers, and that is penalty and overtime rates for Australia's lowest paid workers. It'll ensure that award-reliant workers continue to be fairly compensated for working overtime or working those unsocial, irregular or unpredictable hours, weekends, public holidays and/or shifts. It preserves the commission's existing powers under, in particular, section 144 to insert flexibility terms into awards. That allows employers and employees to enter into individual flexibility arrangements, including to vary penalty and overtime rates, as long as the existing legislated safeguard of ensuring they are better off compared to the standard terms is met. The bill preserves the commission's existing powers under section 160 of the act to vary a modern award to remove any ambiguity, uncertainty or to correct an error. The safeguards in the enterprise bargaining framework remain unchanged. Parties would still be able to bargain at the enterprise level to reduce that existing rate, so long as the commission is satisfied the enterprise agreement meets the better off overall test. As I said earlier, in my electorate there are 8,925 people employed in the retail industry, 6,328 employed in the construction industry and many thousands of others employed in the hospitality industry and in health work who all work shifts, weekends and public holidays. They will continue to benefit from penalty and overtime rates as a result of this bill. As a result of this bill, it will be guaranteed that they get paid the correct rates if they're working overtime, on weekends and after hours—as they should be. These, as I said, are hardworking Australians. They keep the country going. They're running on weekends, public holidays and late nights, throughout shift hours, so they deserve this system. They deserve a system that compensates them for their work. As I said, many of us are home with our families on the weekends. We enjoy that family life or we enjoy our sport or we enjoy going to the races or we enjoy just going down to the pub for a meal, but there are people that keep all these things running. There are people there who have given up their weekend. They've given up their family. They're working hard to ensure that they earn a little bit of extra money. They've given up that time to service us, to service the rest of the community, and we should never forget that. Next time you're out on a public holiday being served by someone, thank them—thank them for being there servicing us and giving up their time. This bill won't impose any additional costs or red tape. That's really important to note. There are no additional costs, and there's no red tape. It doesn't force employers to bargain either. The government has introduced these significant reforms to reinvigorate enterprise bargaining, including by making the bargaining framework more streamlined and accessible. Since our election in 2022, the government has had a track record of protecting and improving the lives of our Australian workers, especially low-paid workers. For example, our same job, same pay laws have seen thousands of workers receiving up to $60,000 extra in their pay packets each year—another reform that was about dignity and fairness. Two people could have been working side by side doing the exact same job, yet there were loopholes in the law that allowed one to get paid less and the other one more. How is that fair? It is not fair, and we made sure we put an end to that. We 've criminalised intentional wage theft, meaning that starting from 1 January this year any employer who deliberately underpays a worker's wage or entitlements could be committing a criminal offence and could be referred to the Fair Work Ombudsman for criminal prosecution. We've seen many cases where it's systematic. They can argue that it was a mistake or that it was something that they weren't aware of, but we've seen it. It happens and it happens regularly. We saw it in the 7-Eleven story that came out a few years ago. These are people that are working shift work, that are working weekends, yet there are unscrupulous people that will take advantage of them. We don't want that. This government supports everyday hardworking Australians, and it won't end there. Our workplace relations framework has gender equality at its heart, and it's helped reduce the gender pay gap to the lowest level since records began. As I said, I am extremely proud of this bill, and it's something, as we heard earlier, that gives dignity to workers and ensures they get paid the correct amount when they give up their family time and work after hours and extra hours. 19:15 Mr NEUMANN HVO Blair I'm pleased to speak in support of the Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Penalty and Overtime Rates) Bill 2025. In some countries, politics is divided on the basis of religion or race or culture or geography; in Australian politics, it's really based on the attitude people have to bills like this and to the working men and women of this country. We on this side of the chamber represent the working-class people—compare that to the attitude of those opposite in relation to this issue. There's much contention between Labor historians and people in different states as to the origin of the Labor Party. Some people think it's a pub in Balmain. I, as a Queenslander, try and think it's under a ghost gum, the Tree of Knowledge, in Barcaldine in 1891. And there were Labor parties all through the colonial period, rising out of shearers' strikes. On 27 April 1904, Chris Watson led the first Labor ministry not just in Australia but in the world. The first majority Labor government came about when the fifth Australian prime minister, Andrew Fisher, was elected in 1910. That was a situation where we had a majority Labor government. Labor governments, when in power, legislate to protect workers' rights, as with the legislation that's before us here tonight. That's what Labor governments do. It didn't surprise anyone—or it shouldn't have—that one of the first acts of the Labor government in 2022 was to support the rise in minimum wages for millions of Australians, and we've done it again. What we're doing tonight, with this legislation, is making sure that the men and women who work in our workplaces—the teachers, the nurses, the shop assistants, the firies, the ambos and all those people who serve us and who work hard for our local community—can get their penalty rates protected. I never saw anything like that from those opposite during their nine long years of office, not under Abbott nor under Turnbull nor under Morrison as prime ministers—not once. We promised this legislation as one of the very first acts of business if we were re-elected, and we're doing it and honouring it. And this debate is all about honouring our election commitment. I will be really fascinated to see the vote and attitude of those opposite. Because the Labor Party are the party of good, secure jobs and wages that give men and women the opportunity for financial security and dignity in retirement. It is the party that delivered Medicare, superannuation and all the pensions that we have. Those opposite believe in insecurity and not a fair day's pay for a fair day's work. Historically, that's the difference. This bill is one of those pieces of legislation that defines the difference between the Labor side of politics and the non-Labor side of politics. In Australia, that has been the defining issue. You're either Labor or non- or anti-Labor, and that's been the difference in Australian politics since the pastoral workers met under that ghost gum tree in Barcaldine. Millions of Australians will have their penalty rates and overtime rates protected under this legislation—millions! We want to make sure they're protected. The Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Penalty and Overtime Rates) Bill will prevent variations to awards that will reduce or remove an employee's penalty rates or overtime rates—not for us, AWAs, and not for us, WorkChoices; we're going to protect workers' rights. The legislation inserts a high-level principle into the Fair Work Act that operates alongside the modern award objective, ensuring penalty rates and overtime can't be rolled into a single rate of pay which leaves an employee worse off. That reminds you of something that John Howard might have done. The AWAs, WorkChoices and getting rid of the no-disadvantage test were the sorts of stuff they did, only to try and bring them back on the eve of the election in 2007—too little, too late. The public were onto them. They had pens—do you remember the WorkChoices pens and the mousepads they did? They did all that stuff to venerate and worship WorkChoices, only to find on the eve of the election that taking away people's penalty rates and overtime rates was not in their best interests, and the public was on to them. That's why legislation like this is so important. This is about definition between us and them when it comes to industrial relations. This particular bill amends the act of parliament to legislate protections. It's effectively a no-worse-off or no-disadvantage test. Penalty rates and overtime rates are an absolutely essential feature of minimum terms and conditions in modern awards, and safety is crucial for people. Safety equals security. These things should be protected and not reduced, and this bill will ensure penalty rates of workers and awards are protected into the future. Protecting a fair minimum safety net of terms and conditions of employment is crucial for workers who are award reliant and low paid. That's why the Labor Party believes in unions and unionism, in collectivism and in the solidarity that protects you if you're low paid. That's why we believe in terms and conditions that give men and women the opportunity to protect themselves in the workplace. There is economic injustice in this country. There's disadvantage. We don't want a situation where the rich and the powerful—the billionaires and the millionaires—are in a position where they can dictate to working men and women in workplaces without the protection of their unions and without the protection of legislation that protects their rights. This includes a lot of people on awards in my electorate of Blair, including those who work in retail, hospitality and fast food, and warehousing, many of whom are members of the mighty Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association—the SDA or the shoppies. For example, there are 12,700 retail and hospitality workers in Blair, and they make up nearly 15 per cent of the total workforce. One retail worker in my community, Karen, said that picking up weekend work and overtime and earning penalty rates helps her and her colleagues to keep on top of things financially. This is what she said: The importance of penalty rates for people working unsociable hours can't be overstated, especially as they are already on low wages. I see the younger workers particularly, who are struggling to make ends meet in the current financial climate, having to rely on working penalty rate hours to get by. They still have rents and expenses to pay that continue to go up, and they rely on the penalty rates they earn from working holidays and weekends to give them the extra breathing space in their weekly budgets. I agree entirely, Karen. I know the work that you do in shopping centres around Ipswich and I know the work that you've done. I know your community spirit, because I know you personally. Before the election, fellow Queenslander and former minister for employment and workplace relations, Senator Murray Watt, announced a re-elected Albanese Labor government would legislate to protect penalty rates and awards, ensuring the wages of around three million workers wouldn't go backwards. This commitment and this bill will ensure that in the future, and that position is enshrined in law. In recent times we've seen big-business lobby groups in the retail, clerical and banking sectors make applications to the Fair Work Commission to cut penalty rates of low-paid workers from awards. For example, right now the Australian Retailers Association is proposing to vary the retail award to cut entitlements. If they're successful in their applications, these employer groups will reduce the overall income of workers, and they'll be down by thousands of dollars every year. In the retail case, the Albanese government intervened to argue as a matter of principle that the wages of low-paid workers should not go backwards. In stark contrast, the former Leader of the Opposition and former member for Dickson said he wouldn't stand up to the big retailers as they attempted to cut the workers' pay. Indeed, before the election, the coalition gave the green light for big business to cut penalty rates under a future LNP government federally, confirming they would not match the Albanese government's intervention in the application currently before the Fair Work Commission. In comments quietly released on a Friday in February, the LNP admitted that they wouldn't make a submission opposing the application by the big retailers, including Woolworths and Coles, to cut penalty rates and other entitlements in the award covering retail employees. Prior to the election, the then coalition leader stated, 'The independent umpire sets the conditions,' and continues 'and we won't propose any departure from the current arrangements.' In other words, they were happy to stand by for big business to cut the wages and conditions of some of Australia's lowest-paid workers. They were happy just to sit back and watch low-paid workers take a pay cut and happy to side with big business rather than hardworking Australians doing it tough. This is a repeat of the same approach they had when they were last in government, where they refused to support increases in minimum wages, which saw low-paid workers go backward, and it was a deliberate design feature that. That's what they admitted they were doing. In contrast, for three years consecutive years in our first term, the Albanese government had consistently advocated to protect the real wages of low-paid workers at each annual wage review, resulting in an 18.5 per cent increase over the last term of the government—well above inflation. In dollar terms, in the three years since Labor came to government, the national minimum wage has increased by $4.62 per hour, more than $175 per week, $9,120 per year or a 22.7 per cent increase. Against this, the coalition has voted against penalty rates multiple times. This failure was another clear point of difference between the major parties, as workplace relations became a clear election issue. I think the Australian people understood this. You can see that the coalition wanted people to work longer and receive less and, in fact, pay more tax as well—that was their policy, because they voted against our tax cuts. The issue of penalty rates has been on the national agenda for years, and the coalition have lots of form on this. The former Leader of the Opposition and the former shadow minister for employment and workplace relations Senator Cash have been very clear in supporting cuts to penalty rates. They openly supported the decision to cut penalty rates for retail and hospitality workers in 2017. Senator Cash said: Instead of getting double time on Sundays, casuals on the retail award will now get time-and-three-quarters, while permanent staff will get time-and-a-half. Anyone who approaches this issue honestly will acknowledge the benefits the decision will bring for small businesses and jobs. This is a real kick in the guts for many low-paid workers who rely on penalty rates to make ends meet. Of course we've seen the shadow minister, now the member for Goldstein, come out and criticise these laws. We know the coalition doesn't believe in protecting workers' wages and upholding the award safety net. Let's be clear in addressing how we boost productivity in this country. It has never been and will never be a solution, as far as the Labor side of politics is concerned, to make workers do more for less. This legislation is aimed at protecting penalty rates and overtime rates for award-reliant workers to ensure they can't go backwards. They are some of the people I referred to in my speech and the member for Adelaide mentioned in his speech. And what's more, there's even evidence that without penalty and overtime rates, not only would workers be disadvantaged but skills shortages and productivity might end up being worse than before, which is bad for business. After all, better paid workers are happier and more productive. We on the Labor side make no apologies for advocating for higher wages for workers. I was in business for 20 years before I came to this place, and making sure people had good secure jobs and were well paid was absolutely crucial to the function of my law practice to make sure that it operated profitably. I don't understand why those opposite can't see these issues. Real wages have grown for the past five consecutive quarters, in contrast to the previous coalition government's real wages record, which went backwards for five consecutive quarters. When you look at what we are saying here and our track record compared to those opposite, it's only Labor that protects award wages, it's only Labor that protects penalty rates and it's only Labor that protects overtime rates. The contrast between us and them is stark. ADJOURNMENT 103 ADJOURNMENT Federal Election 103 19:30 Mr HOGAN 218019 Page I want to get up to talk about a few things in my adjournment speech tonight. Firstly, I will acknowledge those opposite. The Australian Labor Party obviously had great success at the recent federal election, in the sense of the number of seats they won, so I certainly acknowledge that. I do make the point, though, that the primary votes of the Labor Party—because of the preferential voting system we have in Australia—are interesting. Thirty-four per cent to the coalition and 31 per cent to Labor isn't that stark a difference. But obviously the preferences and the way they work was very advantageous to them. I also want to acknowledge, too, that there were three first speeches this afternoon by three of my colleagues, federal Nat colleagues. I want to acknowledge the three of them: Alison Penfold, David Batt and Jamie Chaffey. They were all just amazing speeches. There were themes in the three speeches, too. They all spoke of the importance of family and community to them, they all professed a belief in their Christian faith and they all spoke about their experiences as children and as adults in small business, and the importance of small business—and family businesses for some of them. So I just want to acknowledge those as well. I did this in the MPI, but, to go back to the election results—and I don't say this with any pride or arrogance—I make the point that the divide in election results between the city and the country is quite interesting, as a federal Nat MP. The Nats haven't lost a seat in the lower house in a federal election since 2007. We've won seats back since then and haven't lost them through the period. It's interesting to observe that there's a stark contrast between city and country Australia at the moment. I make that as a casual observation. Mr Buchholz 230531 Neither have the regional and rural Libs. Mr HOGAN 218019 I take the interjection from the member for Wright. Regional Libs have done very well as well—on three transition seats, I think. The member for Forrest has transitioned, as well as Grey and Monash. Mr Buchholz 230531 They've all hung on. Mr HOGAN 218019 Yes, it's an interesting thing. I take the interjection, Member for Wright. There's an interesting distinction between the city and the country. It's something that we'll need to look at. I've got a few ideas about that, but I'm not going to go into that tonight. I think there's a stark difference between—again, I acknowledge the Labor Party; they can run a great campaign. I don't think they necessarily run as great an economy, and there are some interesting things I want to point out tonight. We raised it again in question time today. I think everyone gets up and talks about integrity. I don't have a problem with the sense that the Labor party, back before the 2022 election, said that they'd done modelling—I believe they did, and I think they believe the modelling was right and the modelling was thorough. That's what they said at the time, and I understand and believe that they believed that, five years later, your power bill would be $275 lower than it was in 2022. That hasn't happened. You may say there are reasons for that, but this government has never acknowledged that. They won't answer the question and they'll go to something else. 'They're down six per cent,' they were saying today. They won't acknowledge that it hasn't happened and, in fact, power bills are up a thousand bucks for most families. They'll say, 'Oh, it's down six per cent in the last year.' That's true, too, but the fact is that—and this is where I think people struggle sometimes with what political leaders are saying—you just need to acknowledge that and maybe explain why you thought that happened. You might have reasons why the modelling—what the model did and what the model assumed that wasn't right should be explained to the public. There are others. Again, there are questions that we were asking yesterday and today in parliament. The Prime Minister was obviously saying in the election campaign, 'The only thing you will need'—I haven't got it!—'when you go and see a GP is this,' and he'd hold up his Medicare card. The statistics have said—this is not me; they're public, so you can't refute them—that bulk-billing has fallen in the last three years. Again you might say, 'There were reasons that happened that were out of our control.' Well, tell us what they were. Then we had the health minister today or yesterday saying, 'We never said that universal bulk-billing would be 100 per cent.' You can see the cleverness here—the slipperiness of the language. It was hundreds of times through the campaign: 'This is all you will need when you go to the GP.' Australians who don't have a lot of time to take in politics, to watch politics or to listen to the debates would believe that and go, 'Great, all we're going to need when we go and see our GP is our Medicare card.' That's not the truth. (Time expired) Climate Change 104 19:35 Ms WITTY 316660 Melbourne Today I rise to speak not just as the member for Melbourne but as a voice for the thousands of people in my community who know we are in a climate emergency. Australians endorsed the Albanese government's policy agenda at this election, which involved protecting jobs and the environment. Our platform included making sensible reforms to protect our environment. In my first months as the member for Melbourne, I've met with advocates from local climate action and environmental groups urgently fighting for these issues. But I've also heard from dozens of other community organisations and hundreds of passionate individuals—people who are worried, who are informed and who are ready for action now. From the grassroots efforts of Yarra Climate Action Now, known as YCAN, to the leadership of Electrify Yarra and the national advocacy from the Australian Conservation Foundation, the message is clear. 'Our communities are mobilising, they are innovating and their message is constant: we are doing our part; we need you to do yours.' At the May election, people put their trust in Labor and rejected the extreme politics on both sides. People in Melbourne want governments, businesses and environmental groups to work together to protect our environment. We want to reap the climate health and economic benefits of sustainable development. My community tells me time is up for taking small steps. Fires, floods and heatwaves are not a distant threat. The impacts of climate change are no longer abstract. They are here. They are now. They are visible. And they are hitting the most vulnerable in our communities first and hardest. In inner Melbourne, it's renters in old drafty houses, struggling to afford cooling, and it's families trying to make their homes cleaner and cheaper to run. People in Fitzroy, Carlton, Richmond and Collingwood don't need another warning from the IPCC. They see it in their gardens, in their power bills and in the smoke haze that creeps in during the summer fire season. They are not waiting; they are acting. I want to tell you about two local environment groups in Melbourne who are taking action. Electrify Yarra is helping households to ditch gas and switch to clean, electric appliances powered by rooftop solar. They are proving that climate action isn't a sacrifice; it's an upgrade. YCAN has spent over a decade knocking on doors, hosting community forums and holding all levels of government to account. Their message is powerful: climate justice must be social justice. And the Australian Conservation Foundation continues to remind us that protecting country is not an option; it's a duty, especially to First Nations people, who have cared for these lands for millennia. These groups and so many others are showing us that a clean energy future isn't a dream; it's already underway. But they can't do it alone. That's why I'm proud to support Labor's Cheaper Home Batteries Program, which is rolling out right now. This is real action that will help households store solar power, slash bills and ease the burden on the grid, all while cutting emissions. It's important in places like Melbourne, where so many residents are embracing clean energy but need support to make it affordable and accessible. Labor is also investing in community batteries, upgrading the grid and electrifying our transport system—important steps that move us towards a zero-emissions future. But we must keep Melbourne going. The people of Melbourne know that a serious response to the climate emergency means continuing to invest in renewable energy and making it accessible to households and businesses, and supercharging the electrification of homes and transport, especially for renters, public housing residents and those living in older buildings. The people of Melbourne are not asking for miracles. They're not asking for perfection; they're asking for courage. When we act on climate, we protect lives, we create jobs, we clean up our air and we build a more just and sustainable Australia. So let's honour the work already happening on the ground by groups like YCAN, Electrify Yarra and many, many others, while we in this place seize the moment before us. We have a responsibility to listen to the communities on the frontline of the fight, to stand with them and to act with urgency. (Time expired) New England Electorate: Energy 105 19:40 Mr JOYCE e5d New England 'The people of Melbourne are not asking for miracles; they're asking for courage'—so have the courage to put the windmills up in your electorate, Member for Melbourne. Have the courage to put the solar panels over your parks, Member for Melbourne. Have the courage to actually live your virtue, Member for Melbourne. Don't just foist it onto us; don't foist your garbage and your virtue onto our seats for us to live with. Put the transmission lines over your suburbs, Member for Melbourne. It's very easy to be brave when you're actually brave when someone else has to pay the price. I say to the member for Melbourne: how would you feel if you came back one day and found a plastic bag tied to your gate with a peg telling you they're going to put transmission lines all over your property? They didn't even have the dignity to come into your house and knock at the door. I say to the member for Melbourne: how would you feel if I took an easement through the middle of your house as you walk out the door and enforce it with security guards and a $12,000 fine if you don't abide by it, backed up by police? I say to the member for Melbourne: how would you feel with helicopters and planes flying over your place to check what you're doing? I say to the member for Melbourne, with your courage: how would you feel if you couldn't pay your power bill and you've been forced out of your house to live in a car, because of the virtue of certain areas where they did have the money to pay for things? I say to the member for Melbourne from me, as the member for New England, that this is personal. This is really personal. I see the member for Blair nodding. I don't know whether you're in agreement or whether you actually believe it. I know the member for Blair is very close to people who this is very personal for them as well. When we had two people, to be quite frank, with English accents, one with a big gabardine coat on and a big scarf and a lady with him who looked like she was off to the races, appeared on my neighbour's place—he is off the grid; he is totally renewable. They have no electricity to their house. That is my neighbour. They just appeared at his house and told him not to discuss it and told him that the transmission lines were going to go over the middle of our valley, over our airstrip that we use for firefighting to put out chemical fires, near his house. His house and my house were actually in the grey area that's shaded in by the corridor. When I saw them, I never turn up and say, 'Do you know who I am?' No, I just turned up in work clothes. They treated us with complete contempt. We were just mud under their feet. Then later on I said, 'I'm going to fight this,' and they basically said, 'Well, you can do what you like.' I said, 'I am actually in politics,' and they went: 'Oh, well, whatever you want. Go your hardest. I don't care.' Then Vikki Campion, my wife, turned up. They said, 'Who are you?' in a sort of disparaging way, and she said, 'Well, I'm a columnist for the Daily Telegraph.' They said, 'No media allowed at this meeting,' and she said: 'Well, hang on, you've just turned up at my place. It's not an official meeting to just launch yourself on our place.' I said: 'Absolutely the media's allowed here. We live here.' They said: 'You're not allowed to report anything we say.' We said: 'We will report everything you say.' For me, after this one and after just listening to the member for Melbourne, that is what is happening to us. I tell you—you see, in New England, I got a good swing to me, both in the primaries and in the two-party preferred, because we are standing up against this garbage—I will fight this garbage. For the first time in my life, this vote actually comes back to my valley, to my people, to the people who are not on the grid. They can't afford electricity. You guys just don't know about it. You talk about it. You talk about people with lived experience. You have no lived experience of this; none. For this one, I don't care where it takes me. I'm going to fight this one to the very bitter end. Health Care 105 19:45 Ms TEESDALE 314526 Bass In Bass, we understand the meaning of doing more with less, particularly when it comes to health. In some of our more regional communities, getting to a doctor can take hours. Bulk-billing GPs are a threatened species, and for many families the rising cost of medicines means making impossible choices. Bass is one of the most underserved electorates in the country when it comes to access to healthcare professionals. I've heard these stories firsthand: a grandmother on a surgery waitlist for years, a child missing out on early intervention or a young person waiting for diagnosis and yet falling through the cracks. But Labor is stepping up. In this year's budget, the Albanese government has delivered the biggest investment in Medicare ever seen in Bass. This includes cheaper medicines, because nobody should be splitting tablets in half to stretch out a script; 1800MEDICARE, a national triage line to provide support 24/7; and an endometriosis and pelvic pain clinic that is already changing lives, where people can feel heard and understood and get the treatment that they need. For urgent but non-emergency care, Launceston's Medicare urgent care clinic continues to be a lifeline for our community. Our clinic is one of the busiest in the country and perhaps the only one that's had to treat multiple Tasmanian devil bites in its time. The numbers don't lie. In the first half of this year, the Launceston Medicare urgent care clinic saw an average of 54 patients per day. Since its expanded opening hours on 1 July, the clinic sees 73 patients on average every day. On its busiest day this month, 84 patients were seen by a doctor at the Medicare urgent care clinic. That's 84 Tasmanians, 84 of my constituents, who did haven't to wait at the emergency department or try to get an after-hours GP appointment. They could see a doctor when and where they needed to, for free. In fact, just last week the clinic saw as many patients in a single day as our already overstretched local hospital emergency department did in a 24-hour period. I shudder to think what people would have done if they hadn't had access to this Medicare urgent care clinic. Labor also knows that to improve health outcomes for people we also need to invest in training and retaining more doctors and building our future workforce in the regions. I was proud to stand alongside the minister for health to announce funding to deliver end-to-end medical training at the University of Tasmania. This means that, for the first time ever, medical students can complete their entire medical degree in Launceston. For a regional community, that is huge. Quite frankly, when I was growing up, that was unheard of. More medical students graduating in Launceston will mean more doctors living and working in Bass. When you train in a regional area, the data tells us that you are more likely to stay in that area. I think of Peta, a local medical student who did her placement with the exceptional Dr Reddy's practice in Beaconsfield. That experience helped her to solidify her future goals. She now wants to be a regional GP because she saw firsthand how powerful that role is within a community. We also know that fully bulk-billing clinics like Dr Reddy's are worth their weight in gold. He has won the Tasmanian award for best clinic and best practice in Tasmania. We are so proud to have him and his work. Thank you very much, Dr Reddy. It is integral that more Tasmanians are able to train closer to home so that more Tasmanians can deliver the health care needed in our community. This is the model that works. This is the commitment that Bass deserves, because every person, no matter their postcode, should be able to access quality, affordable care when and where they need it. Cook Electorate 106 19:49 Mr KENNEDY 267506 Cook On Sunday 27 July, something remarkable took place in my electorate of Cook—something cold but something full of heart. Down at Gunnamatta Bay in Cronulla, just after sunrise, dozens of locals gathered for the Special Olympics Polar Plunge. It's not every day you see members of the police, emergency services, community volunteers and sports teams like the Cronulla water polo team sprinting into icy water in the middle of winter, but that's exactly what happened—and they did it for a reason that deeply matters. The polar plunge is part of the Special Olympics Australia and the Law Enforcement Torch Run, raising both awareness and funds for Australians with intellectual disabilities and autism. It's more than sport. It's about belonging. It's about inclusion, not just in words but in actions. There was a torch run through Gunnamatta reserve and a ceremonial torch lighting and then the plunge itself. Everyone from young athletes to senior officers took part. The money raised during the events will fund uniforms, equipment, transport and competition opportunities for athletes who too often face barriers to participation. It means more kids on fields, more smiles on podiums and more stories of achievement in every postcode of Cook. To the organisers, volunteers and especially the athletes, thank you for what you've done—not just for raising money but for reminding us all what inclusion and community looks like. I want to congratulate the Wanda Surf Life Saving Club, which has served the Sutherland Shire with distinction for 75 years. It's more than a surf club; it's a community institution built on service, self-sacrifice and teamwork. Each year, Wanda recognises members who go above and beyond to keep our Bate Bay and our club culture strong. I want to recognise the 2024-25 major award winners, who reflect the best of that tradition. Congratulations to: Grant Sandstrom, Most Consistent Member; Mark McGuinness, Open Lifesaver of the Year; and Lawrence Scanlon, Junior Lifesaver of the Year. The Golden Cap Award went to Joshua Van Dyk, and the Member Services Award went to Paul Russell. Adam New was named Most Outstanding IRB Operator. Ken Smith was awarded Most Outstanding Instructor. Dane Sutton was awarded Open Ski Paddler of the Year. Charlotte Bowmer was awarded Swimmer of the Year. Noah Steiner was awarded Board Paddler of the Year. Kyle Mason was awarded Beach Athlete of the Year. The Masters Awards recognised Robyn Lester as Master Beach Athlete of the Year, Michael Georgaris as Master Water Athlete of the Year and Nick Middleton as Iron Person of the Year. In leadership roles, Layla White received the Beach Captain's Award, Ben Sutton received the Champion Lifesaver Captain's Award and Deborah Wallis received the March Past Captains Award. The Boat Captain's Award went to William Cregan and Molly Parker, and Olivia Dalgliesh was named Most Improved Junior Boat Rower. The Boat Crew of the Year—the Wanda Weapons—included Matthew Pescud, Jack Spooner, Hayden Ward and Bradley Querzoli. Nathan Spinner was the sweep. Emily Caterson and Isaac Lo were names R&R Competitors of the Year, and the open male R&R team—Colin Jones, Kurt Melville, Stuart Smith, Grant Sandstrom, Brock Douglas, with Gordon McKirdy as coach—received the Most Consistent and Improved Team Award. Brett Porteous was recognised as IRB Captain, a vital role in coordinating water safety and rescue. In youth development, we saw: Under 15 Most Improved, Lawrence Scanlon and Ella McGuinness; Under 15 Most Outstanding, Ryan Harris and Kyah Gallen; Under 17 Most Improved, Rhys Wakeham and Jess Henville; Under 17 Most Outstanding, Kyle Mason, Dane Sutton, Charlotte Bowmer and Mia Greacen; Under 19 Most Consistent, Will Steiner and Sienna Alderson; and Under 19 Most Outstanding, Joel Steiner and India Hulbert. The Open Most Outstanding awards went to Kai Hammond and Emma Blanch. Finally, Jeff 'Charlie' Brown was named Volunteer Coach of the Year, and Natasha Seidel received Official of the Year. These names represent more than just awards. They represent hours of patrols, mornings of trainings and years of contribution. The impact of Wanda Surf Life Saving Club reaches every corner of the Sutherland Shire, whether it's keeping our beaches safe or mentoring the next generation of leaders. To all award recipients, congratulations. Blair Electorate 107 19:54 Mr NEUMANN HVO Blair My campaign in Blair at the last election was focused on cost-of-living relief, health and delivering key road and community infrastructure needed in my rapidly growing community. I was able to announce a multimillion-dollar package of initiatives, which were the product of years of hard work and building relationships with a range of stakeholders on the ground including councils, community and sporting clubs. It meant the final suite of local commitments I announced really resonated with people. The reality is that Ipswich and the areas west of Brisbane are some of the fastest-growing regions in the country. We need to invest in infrastructure and services to support the booming population. That's why the Albanese government is investing more than $400 million in road and transport infrastructure in Blair. As part of this, I was delighted to announce, with the Treasurer, $200 million to fix the notorious Amberley interchange bottleneck and black spot on the Cunningham Highway with a grade separated interchange. This is on top of $16 million I announced last year, with the federal minister for infrastructure, for business cases for this area, as well as the Ripley and Swanbank interchanges, with $4 million committed by the former Queensland Labor government. This project is vital to improve safety and congestion across Ipswich, but is particularly important for access to RAAF Base Amberley, the biggest operational air force base in the country and a hub for the recent Talisman Sabre exercise. There was also $20 million for the critical Brisbane Valley Highway safety upgrades, first announced in this year's budget, which brought the total of federal government contributions to $40 million for this vital artery in Ipswich and the Somerset region. I was particularly thrilled to announce $5.5 million to assist the Federation of Indian Communities of Queensland, or FICQ, with you, Mr Speaker, to establish a new 'House of India' community and cultural centre in the very diverse greater Springfield area. Complementing this was $700,000 that you and I, Mr Speaker, announced for the upgrade of the YMCA Springfield Central Community Centre for a shared community space for multicultural and sporting groups. When it comes to our precious native wildlife, we committed $1.2 million for the Chuwar Koala and Native Fauna Conservation Park in Ipswich. This will help Goodness Enterprises charity establish a rescued koala rehabilitation centre to rehabilitate injured koalas for release into the wild. Something near and dear to my heart was a $5 million commitment for a one-court extension of the Ipswich basketball stadium on top of the $2 million we committed previously to increase the number of courts from four to five for club competition purposes. It will also assist in state competitions. This builds on the commitment I announced previously. Ipswich is rugby league heartland, so another project I'm really excited about is our $4. 5 million in funding for the Ipswich City Council to establish a new rugby league, sports centre and Monterea sports field located in the Ripley Valley Priority Development Area, the PDA, for new fields, a clubhouse and lighting. I'm hopeful the council will see fit to put my old rugby league club, Swifts, in a long-term lease in this locale. It would be the making of the Swifts as they really need a home. The Somerset region didn't miss out, with $4.05 million to redevelop the Lowood pool and $1.6 million for upgrades to the Fernvale Sports Park netball courts, both of which I was proud to announce with Senator Anthony Chisholm, who I think should really become the senator for Blair as he spends so much time there. I'm looking forward to him renting a house in Ipswich! Finally, the Speaker and I were pleased to recommit a re-elected federal Labor government to a new headspace centre in Redbank Plains to support young people seeking mental health support—a very worthwhile initiative. Some of these commitments rely on matching state government funding, but despite the Queensland Premier's comment about the need for an Ipswich infrastructure plan, his state budget in June was very disappointing. It had no funding for big ticket transport and main roads projects in Ipswich. Critically, there was simply no matched funding for our $200 million commitment for the Amberley interchange, despite the member for Scenic Rim having a billboard there arguing for it! On top of this, there were no updates on projects I'd previously secured funding for, namely the Mount Crosby Road interchange, Bremer River Bridge and the Ipswich Motorway's Darra to Oxley upgrades, or even the Ipswich to Springfield rail line business case. Not a dollar! I will continue to push the Crisafulli government for a commitment to fund these important projects. House adjourned at 20:00 NOTICES 108 NOTICES Presentation 108

Wednesday, 30 July 2025

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

 

CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS 109 CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS Surf Life Saving Sydney Branch Awards of Excellence, Han-de-Beaux, Ms Sarah 109 09:30 Ms SPENDER 286042 Wentworth I want to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the many volunteers in Wentworth who dedicate themselves to protecting our community and our precious coastal environment. First, I'd like to congratulate Tamarama Surf Life Saving Club for their outstanding success in the recent Surf Life Saving Sydney Branch Awards of Excellence. For over a century, Tamarama have welcomed and safeguarded locals and visitors, and their impact is profound. At the awards, Tamarama was named club of the year. The education team won service team of the year, and Amelia Curtis was named administrator of the year. They also received the innovation award for establishing the women-in-lifesaving network—now embraced by neighbouring clubs. These honours are a credit to president Sandra Fox and her exceptional team, and it's pretty incredible they did this all while trying to finalise a really beautiful renovation. I also want to acknowledge other local clubs for their achievements. Clovelly's Glen Clarke won facilitator of the year and Dominic Winkle won volunteer of the year. Bronte won rescue of the month in March 2025. North Bondi won joint rescue of the month in February 2025 with Bondi. Bondi's Dori Miller won masters athlete of the year, Robyn Carr won official of the year and Gareth 'Chop' Robinson won surf lifesaver of the year. These winners now progress to the New South Wales awards in August, and I wish them every success. It is a privilege to represent some of Sydney's coastal communities, where volunteers not only save lives but also care deeply for the environment. I recently spoke with Sarah Han-de-Beaux, a shark researcher and member of Dive Centre Bondi. Sarah also manages Spot A Shark, a community science project that collects photos of grey nurse sharks from diver interactions along Australia's east coast. Fearsome as they may look in their classic shark physique with pointy snout and visible teeth—I have to say, the first time I ever dived with sharks, I was quite intimidated as they glided passed—grey nurse sharks are, in fact, gentle giants. Some of them are very well known to locals. Phil, Mia, Harry, Megan, Georgie and Winston are just some of the grey nurse sharks that have been spotted at dive sites along Bondi and South Head. Sadly, this species is listed as critically endangered on the east coast of Australia due to habitat degradation and the impacts of fishing and mitigation strategies like shark nets. People like Sarah and programs like Spot A Shark are essential in supporting research, building awareness and driving conservation. In a week when many of us have been invited to the screening of Ocean, I echo the spirit of David Attenborough. Let's follow the examples of our surf lifesaving clubs and citizen scientists and protect the extraordinary community and environment we are lucky to share. I'm proud that protecting the oceans is going to be really important focus for me in this term. Tilly Aston Community Awards 109 09:33 Ms DOYLE 299962 Aston Congratulations on your appointment, Deputy Speaker Mascarenhas. I rise today to speak about our annual Tilly Aston Community Awards, which seek to recognise and honour the contributions and achievements of the wonderful Aston community. These awards, like my electorate, are named after Tilly Aston, a trailblazing woman—arguably one of Australia's first disability activists—and a true inspiration. Tilly lost her sight at a young age, but she never let that define or limit her. Instead, she became a poet, a teacher and a fierce advocate for the rights of people with disabilities, founding the Victorian Association of Braille Writers and the Association for the Advancement for the Blind. She was a pioneer in inclusive education and the first blind woman in Australia to attend university. The Tilly Aston Community Awards honour her legacy by celebrating individuals and groups that have demonstrated exceptional dedication, leadership and a positive impact in various aspects of community life. These are the quiet achievers, selfless volunteers and local heroes who go above and beyond to make our community in Aston a better place to live, work and thrive. To often, the people who hold our communities together do so without fanfare or accolades. They don't ask for recognition, but they absolutely deserve it. That's why initiatives like these awards are so important. They shine a light on the good happening around us and celebrate the everyday leadership, kindness and compassion that keeps our suburbs strong. From volunteers in multicultural associations and sporting clubs to those helping our environment, supporting the elderly or mentoring young people, this award is for them. It's about saying thank you and building a culture that values service and community connection. There are four group categories and 10 individual categories from which to choose. These include the Leadership Award, the Volunteer of the Year Award, the Teacher of the Year Award and the prestigious Lifetime Achievement Award. As the federal member for Aston it is my great honour to champion these awards, which are held annually to ensure the spirit of Tilly Aston lives on in not just memory but action. I encourage every constituent to nominate someone they admire or someone who quietly makes a difference. Let's tell their stories and let's lift each other up. As Tilly herself once said, nothing worthy is ever achieved without perseverance. However, you do not have to wait for someone else to nominate you; self-nominations are most welcome. But you need to hurry; nominations are closing on Sunday 10 August, and the winners will be announced at the awards ceremony on Saturday 30 August. To everyone out there rolling up their sleeves, helping their local community and raising voices for the vulnerable: these awards are for you. I look forward to reading all the wonderful nominations. South Australia: Marine Environment 110 09:36 Ms SHARKIE 265980 Mayo My electorate of Mayo, and virtually the entire coastline of South Australia, is in the midst of an environmental catastrophe. The harmful algal bloom is an unprecedented natural disaster. On top of the environmental impacts, there are devastating economic and social impacts for businesses, industries and communities. I'm hearing stories of businesses experiencing financial hardship, staff having their hours reduced and families cancelling beach holidays. This is affecting coastal communities in every sense. The South Australian government has offered business owners $10,000 grants, and up to $100,000 is available for commercial fishers and aquaculture licences. This is a positive start but this support does not go far enough, and the federal government needs to step in and help more. The $14 million from the Commonwealth is not enough; that's less than half a roundabout. The Prime Minister should declare this a natural disaster, a national emergency, because it is a disaster of national significance. It feels like it's a bushfire under the sea. The National Emergency Declaration Act 2020 allows for preparation, response and recovery from emergencies that cause or are likely to cause nationally significant harm. There is a broad definition which constitutes nationally significant harm; harm to life, health, animals, plants and the environment are included among the criteria. An emergency declaration would trigger federal assistance, payments including one-off financial support and a short-term income support payment for those whose income is affected by disaster. We need a COVID-style package offering help. There are workers without incomes, families facing hardships, small businesses struggling to stay afloat and whole industries in jeopardy. South Australia's beachside communities are facing an uncertain future, and there is no end in sight. We can all help by visiting affected communities, and I would say that to everybody in Mayo: go down and visit, go to the pub or go and do your shopping down on one of our coastal communities and support our local businesses. These communities deserve more support from the federal government. The Prime Minister recently said that the people of Australia voted and said, 'Yes, we do judge a society by how it looks after the most vulnerable.' Well, right now, Prime Minister, we are incredibly vulnerable in Mayo and in South Australia. We need those words put into action. This vulnerability is through no fault of our own. We need the federal government to step up, help us and make those words reality. Calwell Electorate: Hume City Football Club, Calwell Electorate: St Thomas Jacobite Syrian Orthodox Church 110 09:38 Mr ABDO 316915 Calwell Sport plays a huge part in the life of my community in Calwell. Across the area, there is always a game going on somewhere on the basketball courts, the footy grounds, the cricket pitches, the netball and tennis courts and the soccer fields all over the electorate. The games we play are part of who we are as an area. Earlier this month, I had the opportunity to visit Hume City FC as they hosted a Junior Super League three-day tournament featuring 172 teams. The teams ranged in age from under-8s to under-13s—although some would say the parents were also playing from the sidelines, such was the level of excitement! To see the pictures of the club buzzing with skill and energy, and all the kids from across the state showing up and showing us what the game is all about—in an age where the lure of screens and online distractions is hard for parents to combat, the role of strong, well-run, inclusive clubs like Hume City and tournaments like this matters so much. I want to thank Ersan Gulum, the club president, who shows that you can leave the area but the area never leaves you. Ersan played professionally overseas and now has returned to foster the next generation of players at home in what I would call the real big leagues. I'd also like to thank club secretary Haydin Bekir and Hadi Bultan, a fierce advocate for the club. Congratulations to all at Hume City Football Club for the work they do. I am certain I was in the presence of a number of young future Matildas and Socceroos. Earlier this month I was very pleased to join members of the St Thomas Jacobite Syrian Orthodox Church in Dallas in my electorate for the feast of St Thomas. The spiritual Jacobite Syrian Orthodox community is comprised of worshippers who hail from various corners of the world, particularly from India's Kerala region. Since its founding in 2013, the church has grown into something truly special: a spiritual and cultural home. I especially want to pay tribute to Fr Dr Jacob Joseph, vicar and president, for his beautiful and truly heartfelt words; Mr Jijo George, secretary; and Mr Binoj John for his service to the community. I saw first-hand how places like this church enrich our community. At a time when so many are searching for meaning, for connection, for belonging, this congregation offers exactly that. This church, like so many other places of worship in the area, is a reminder that Australia's great strength lies in its diversity and in the freedom to live one's faith with purpose and peace. Robinson, Ms Roylene 111 09:41 Ms LANDRY 249764 Capricornia Across Australia there are everyday heroes quietly going about their work, changing lives without ever seeking recognition. In Rockhampton one of those heroes is Roylene Robinson. I recently had the great privilege of visiting an op shop in Rockhampton, Moo & Coo. On the surface it might look like a simple op shop, but, when you step inside, you quickly realise it's so much more than that. It's a hub of compassion, community and care, and at the heart of it all is Roylene. Roylene has been giving back to her community for decades. In fact, for the past 47 years, she has selflessly opened her home and her heart to 280 foster children, a staggering achievement from one woman whose love, patience and generosity knows no bounds. While many people would be winding down in retirement, Roylene is as busy as ever. Through Moo & Coo she continues to provide dignity and support to those doing it tough. She and a small-but-mighty team of volunteers are a lifeline to people from all walks of life: those escaping domestic violence, families struggling to put food on the table or men trying to get back on their feet after time in prison. Roylene believes in lifting others up not just by meeting their basic needs but by treating every single person with respect and care. Moo & Coo is what Roylene describes as a real op shop where everything is genuinely affordable. It's not just about lower prices; it's about practical help. The store provides food packages, ready-to-heat meals, baby bundles, school supplies, dignity packs, furniture, clothing—whatever people need, Roylene finds a way to provide. Right now, the demand is greater than ever. The cost-of-living crisis is biting hard. Families are being pushed to their limits by soaring rent, petrol prices and grocery bills. A recent Salvation Army social justice stocktake report confirms what many of us in Capricornia already know: our region is in the grip of a housing crisis. Eighty-two per cent of people surveyed identified housing affordability or homelessness as a major issue. Nearly half of them said it was impacting them personally. It's estimated that there are 574 people currently homeless in Capricornia, and we're short over 3,500 dwellings. Add to that that 58 per cent of people in our community are experiencing financial hardship. These numbers are shocking, and behind each one is a real person; a real story; a story of struggle, resilience and, too often, falling through the cracks. That's where people like Roylene step in. When the systems fail and people are at their lowest, Roylene and her volunteers are there offering food, offering comfort, offering hope. Roylene's heart beats for her community, and her work reminds us of the power of kindness. She isn't motivated by headlines or awards; she's driven by compassion. In a world where people often feel forgotten, Roylene makes them feel seen. Today I want to say thank you on behalf of our community, on behalf of every person you've helped, on behalf of every child whose life is better because of you. You are the very definition of a local hero, and Capricornia is stronger because of you. Whitlam Electorate: Renewable Energy, Albanese Government: Renewable Energy 111 09:44 Ms BERRY 23497 Whitlam Today I would like to highlight two outstanding clean energy initiatives in the electorate of Whitlam. The first is the recently launched Illawarra Clean Energy Roadmap, which was commissioned by Business Illawarra and delivered in partnership with the University of Wollongong's Energy Futures Network as well as a dozen other government and industry collaborators. The roadmap outlines a strategy for the Illawarra to be Australia's leading clean energy hub by 2050 through the delivery of renewable energy, green hydrogen and advanced manufacturing. The Illawarra is strongly positioned to deliver the strategy because it has been designated a renewable energy zone, it has a strong industrial base with a skilled workforce, it has key infrastructure, including established rail links and a deep-water port, and there is real industry demand for renewable energy solutions. The economic opportunity that will flow from the Illawarra Clean Energy Roadmap is substantial, with the potential to generate more than 15,000 local jobs and inject more than $10 billion into the New South Wales economy. The second initiative I would like to highlight was launched last year in the Southern Highlands by WinZero, or Wingecarribee Net Zero Emissions. WinZero's virtual energy network is a community-led initiative that connects local solar energy generators with their neighbours, including small businesses, allowing the sharing of excess solar power within the community. This benefits both the solar producers, who want to sell their surplus energy at a fair price and those households and businesses that don't have solar panels but would like to purchase local clean energy. The Southern Highlands trial has been so successful that Deakin University is leading a new study to see if the scope can be widened to the entire national electricity market. I applaud all those involved in both of these initiatives to make such a valuable contribution to Australia's transition to renewable energy. I'm honoured to have been appointed to the Standing Committee on Climate Change, Energy, Environment and Water, and I look forward to working closely with my parliamentary colleagues to continue this important work. In its first term the Albanese Labor government approved a record number of renewable energy projects—enough to power more than 10 million homes—and enshrined emissions targets in law, with a target of net zero emissions by 2050. The re-elected Albanese Labor government is committed to delivering more clean and reliable renewable energy, and getting our energy grid to 82 per cent renewables by 2030. Australia boasts the highest rate of rooftop solar in the world, and this government's $2.3 billion Cheaper Home Batteries Program will help to bring down the cost of a typical battery by about 30 per cent. It is seeing more than 15,000 households add storage to their homes as more Australians embrace renewable energy. I am proud of the significant progress being made by Australians, including the two clean energy initiatives I've highlighted in the electorate of Whitlam. (Time expired) Cybersafety 112 09:47 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher Nine years ago I came into politics because I wanted to make a difference to my community. I felt passionately about a lot of things, and the protection of children was one of them. In 2020, when I was the chair of the Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs, I conducted a report which looked into the dangers of online wagering and online pornography for children under 18 years of age. We provided this report, and this report came out in February 2020. Our government provided a response in 2021, and nothing has been done since. I know there has been a change of government, but what we are seeing—we've all heard the phrase, 'you shouldn't be able to do online what you can't do in the real world', and that is very true. You can't, as a 16-year-old or 14-year-old or even an eight-year-old, walk into a newsagents and by a Penthouse or a Playboy or get access to pornography in the real world, yet you can do it online. You can go onto your computer or your iPad and just tick a box to say you are 18 years of age. The report finds that the likes of Pornhub are preying on our children—as young as eight—because they want a captive audience through their teenage years and into their adulthood. The most vile—and we're not just talking about the pornography of yesteryear of full-frontal nudity, we're talking about hardcore, violent, misogynistic pornography that is very demeaning of women. So I want to send out a challenge to this new Labor government: pick up these recommendations. The report is called Protecting the age of innocence. The report was also delivered by the likes of the member for Macquarie and the member for Macarthur. It was a bipartisan recommendation to introduce age verification for online pornography and online wagering. A child can't walk into a TAB and put a bet on the horses, nor should they be able to do it online. This is really simple stuff. There's a lot of talk about social media. I sat on that inquiry as well. It's really important stuff, absolutely. But let's revisit this report, Protecting the edge of innocence. Our children only get one chance to be kids, and we need to provide the tools to parents to help them. Griffith Electorate: Koalas 112 09:50 Ms COFFEY 312323 Griffith Griffith is lucky to have an urban koala population, which extends through the bush corridors connecting Whites Hill Reserve to Toohey Forest. Our colony is part of our community, and their presence as a reminder of just how lucky we are to live in a city that still has pockets of rich living biodiversity. In the last term, the former environment minister, Tanya Plibersek, and I visited the Whites Hill Reserve, where she had previously announced $76 million in funding over four years from the Saving Koalas Fund to support habitat rehabilitation. And I know our current minister for the environment and water, Senator Murray Watt, has also visited the reserve. In May, I participated in the Great Koala Count with B4C, in partnership with UQ, at Whites Hill Reserve, where we spotted 22 koalas. We know koala numbers are decreasing due to habitat loss and fragmentation, road mortality, dog attacks, disease and climate change. In my community, we are fortunate to have dedicated volunteers who will sit on the roadside overnight when koalas are close and in possible danger. Devastatingly, last week we lost eight koalas in our area. These deaths are heartbreaking, and I share the grief that our community feels. Our local rescuers are exhausted, sleep deprived and devastated from this past week's losses. I thank the council for the progress that has been made at Whites Hill, with the overpass and fencing, and I've been in touch with our local councillor and our state member to discuss what more can be done to support our local populations. As we approach breeding season, I urge our wonderful community to drive slowly, leave a gap and scan roadsides for wildlife, especially between dusk and dawn. I want to acknowledge the hard work of the Bulimba Creek Catchment Coordinating Committee, Koala Rescue Brisbane South, the Friends of Whites Hill Reserve and also the Queensland Koala Society and the Save the Koalas and Wallabies of Whites Hill. Koalas are more than just a national symbol; they are a vital part of our local environment. Their survival is closely connected to the health of our ecosystems, and, when we protect koalas, we're also protecting the broader environment we share. Renewable Energy 113 09:53 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina Labor's reckless race to 82 per cent renewables by 2030 means that 28,000 kilometres of transmission lines are going to be put across prime agricultural land, native bushland and pristine coastline. We are all sent here to do a job; we are all sent here by our constituents to represent them, to stick up for them, to back them, and this is what I'm doing with the net zero approach that I have adopted. By constructing tens of thousands of kilometres of transmission lines across rural and regional Australia in pursuit of a false ideology, the government is industrialising fertile rural farmland on a massive scale. I do believe the greatest moral challenge facing humankind is to be able to grow enough food to feed a hungry world. There are too many children going to bed with hungry stomachs across the globe at the moment. And many of those kids are in Australia. When we are taking up arable farmland with solar panels, wind towers and transmission lines, it means that we can't grow the food that we once were able to. It means that our farmers are leasing their land to largely multinational corporations—and these people are shysters. They have come into my Riverina electorate and divided families and communities. They have ended friendships that have lasted generations, all for the sake of the almighty dollar. For them, it's not about saving the planet; it's about making money. They have deep pockets, they have no conscience and they are dividing communities. I won't stand for it, and neither will the communities. I heard the new member for Whitlam talking about renewable energy zones. Good luck to her; I wish her communities well with those proposals. But the area in the Riverina where they are plonking these wind towers, at a height of 260 metres—90 of them between Binalong and Bowning—is not a REZ. It's not a renewable energy zone. But that hasn't stopped these multinational corporations. That has not stopped these spivs. And, if you're not accepting what one of these spivs says, just wait, because six weeks later they'll send out another community engagement liaison person. What happened at Mangoplah was that the proponent dropped a whole heap of brochures into the local farm centre and said, 'Would you mind distributing these?' That's simply not good enough. They want to plonk battery energy storage systems all over the area. The local rural fire service volunteers have said that they won't put out their fires, because they're worried about the toxicity of the flames. It's their health. It's their future. People have had enough in rural and regional Australia, and they are saying, 'Stop this nonsense.' Women in Parliament, Corangamite Electorate: Gender Equality 113 09:56 Ms COKER 263547 Corangamite When women do well, we all do well. When women are represented in government, policies are better designed to improve lives and address the unique challenges women face in our communities. The Albanese government is an example of this inaction, and that didn't happen by chance. It happened because Labor recognised that, when women are at the table, policy outcomes improve everyone's lives. Some perfect examples of this are Labor's 26 weeks of paid parental leave with super on top, 10 days of paid family violence leave and endometriosis clinics right across the nation. This principle is also driving action in my electorate of Corangamite. A local group, Women in Local Democracy, or WILD, is leading the charge to improve gender representation in our councils. This goal is ambitious and absolutely necessary to achieve gender parity by the 2028 local government elections. I'm honoured to be the patron of WILD and to work alongside the extraordinary women leading this effort, including Jenny Wells, a tireless advocate who recently stepped down as president, and Kate Lockhart, who brings great energy and vision to the role. Recently, I joined Jenny, Kate and many others in Geelong for the inaugural Empowering Women 50/50 Network oration, delivered by Victoria's first gender equity commissioner, Dr Niki Vincent. I want to thank Dr Vincent for her leadership and for her powerful address. That night was a celebration of how far we've come and a rallying call for the work that still lies ahead. We know gender equality doesn't just happen by accident. It takes leadership, commitment and collective action, and we are making progress. Australia has just achieved its highest ever ranking in the World Economic Forum's gender gap index. We're now sitting 13th out of 148 countries. That is up 11 places. It reflects the impact of deliberate sustained action in areas like political empowerment and economic participation and education. Federally, we now have the highest proportion of women in government, 56 per cent of government members, and, for the first time, we have a majority of women in cabinet. These milestones matter, not just symbolically but because they help deliver better, fairer outcomes for all Australians. That's why I'll continue working with WILD and the Empowering Women 50/50 Network to grow their reach, strengthen community and champion diversity across our local government, from Surf Coast to Queenscliff, from Golden Plains to Kalka Way to Greater Geelong. This is an ambition worth fighting for, and together, I know we'll get there. Canning Electorate: Environment 114 09:59 Mr HASTIE 260805 Canning Today I rise to raise a stinker of an issue, and I'm not just playing with words. We have a stink that hangs over the northern part of my electorate, and it's making life miserable for thousands of residents in Lakelands, Madora Bay, Singleton, Meadow Springs and beyond. I'm referring to the persistent and foul odour coming from businesses near these suburbs in Nambeelup. The smell is making homes unlivable. Outdoor activities are becoming unbearable. Families are embarrassed to invite friends over and socialise. Kids can't play outside of school, and people are forced to keep their windows closed in the middle of summer. They can't turn their air conditioning on, because the smell is then blown into their homes. This isn't normal, and it shouldn't be accepted. The smell is so bad that the Western Australian Department of Water and Environmental Regulation has a dedicated reporting function on its website just for the smell. This is not normal and should not be accepted. Thousands of people have reported it, and when they follow up they're provided with a generic response saying the department is aware of the issue—bureaucratic jargon for, 'We're not going to do anything about this.' Labor's WA environment minister is silent, and local Labor members are missing in action. In April I held a community forum on this issue, and hundreds of locals turned up, including people I'd never met before, because when your backyard smells like landfill you want answers. I invited the WA environment minister and the department to attend the forum, but they declined. Apparently, the urgency felt by the community wasn't enough to drag them out of their offices. I think their absence speaks volumes. It's easy to ignore a problem when you're not the one breathing it in. I've been chasing a meeting with the minister since April, and I'm pleased to report that I finally secured a meeting in September. I'll be bringing more than polite conversation to this meeting, and, if the minister won't come to Mandurah, I'll bring Mandurah to him. Last week I launched a petition on my website, calling on the WA government to take action, which has already been signed by nearly 700 locals. The result is more than a petition; it's a community sick and tired of being ignored. I'll be tabling the petition at the appropriate time, and I'll show it to the minister along with every concern and story I've been told by locals. I'd like to thank the locals that have raised this issue with me, especially Wendy, who manages a Facebook page with more than 1,000 members on this very issue. I suspect the minister would love for me to be quiet about this, but that's why we come here and represent our constituents on all issues; that's our job. I won't stop talking about this until there's a real outcome. For local families, local businesses and kids stuck indoors, I call on the Western Australian state government to stop dodging and start listening. My community deserves better. Maribyrnong Electorate: Community Organisations 114 10:02 Ms BRISKEY 263427 Maribyrnong In my first speech to parliament, I reflected on how community organisations are the heart and soul of my electorate of Maribyrnong. Weekends are for local footy, soccer, netball and many more. There's hardly a vacant oval or field in sight. But, if sport is not your thing, then there are many other groups to choose from, from multicultural groups to conservation groups, seniors groups and many more. Without them, our community would not be the vibrant, happening place that it is and that I'm so proud to represent in this parliament. Since my election in May, I had the great pleasure of visiting many of these organisations and hearing from the amazing people who work and volunteer their time to make our community happy, healthy and connected. One of the first groups I met with was the Essendon Historical Society, a great group of dedicated historians documenting the history of Moonee Valley. History reminds us all of the great legacy we have inherited from members of this community, and I take this opportunity to acknowledge the labour of love that Cate and the team put into ensuring our community's history is not only recorded but celebrated. I also had the recent pleasure of attending the 10-year anniversary of the Strathmore Men's Shed. This group is what community is all about. There is an epidemic of male loneliness in our country, but the Strathmore Men's Shed is bringing our community together by providing a space for people to connect and share in the activities that they love. With a membership of over 80, and having been named in the top 10 men's sheds in metro Melbourne, I know that this fantastic local institution will continue to go from strength to strength. As I also mentioned in my first speech, we are blessed in Maribyrnong with great sporting clubs and even better community spirit. A fun fact: the Moonee Valley local government area, or LGA, is home to the most bowls clubs in the country. Everywhere you look in Maribyrnong, you are greeted with the bright-green lawns and warm hospitality that only a local bowls club can provide. I want to shout out in particular the Essendon, Buckley Park and Maribyrnong Park bowls clubs, who have received funding from the Albanese Labor government to help build a bowls super-hub. This project will simply 'bowl' you over with the major redevelopment of the Cooper Street site where all three clubs will come together as one. Then there's the mighty Gladstone Park Bowling Club, who have also received funding to upgrade their facilities and build a new synthetic bowls green. I look forward to working with these wonderful clubs to ensure that these projects are delivered. There are many more amazing groups to acknowledge, and I look forward to spending my time in this place talking up them and the incredible contributions they make to our community. Every group I have met so far has been inspiring, and it is an honour and a privilege to represent them in this parliament. Flinders Electorate: Australia Post 115 10:04 Ms McKENZIE 124514 Flinders I rise today to fight Australia Post's decision to close the Rosebud Plaza post office on 29 August of this year. This is a disgraceful and most callous decision. The nearest alternative post office is two kilometres away, which may not sound like much to you, Deputy Speaker, and to others in this chamber, but it needs to be taken in the context of Flinders being one of the oldest electorates in the country. Eighty-three per cent of our land mass has no access to any public transport. This closure will make accessing postal services extremely difficult for many residents. Rosebud Plaza is the hub of retail activity on the southern Mornington Peninsula. Almost 30 per cent of residents of Rosebud are aged 65 or over, compared to 17 per cent in the rest of Victoria. According to the 2021 census, we need to do more to look after this age demographic, and expecting our seniors to walk long distances just to get to the post office is not feasible. Residents have expressed concern that surrounding post offices will be unable to absorb the additional demand. Long queues already occur, especially around Christmas, when two million visitors come to the Peninsula, and this decision will make the situation even worse. I have written to Australia Post and the federal Minister for Communications seeking further information and urging them to keep this post office open to maintain local access to essential postal services. Since launching a petition on 17 June, more than 1,300 have people signed. I've heard from seniors, people with disabilities and carers who say this service is vital to staying both independent and connected. Many are writing on behalf of elderly family members and many in their own capacity as a person with a disability or indeed as a senior citizen. One thing is clear: closing this post office will be to the detriment of the Rosebud and Capel Sound community. It will reduce access to postal services for our most vulnerable community members, isolating them, to some extent, from the outside world. Tracy van Lieshout wrote to me: 'I am disabled. I live nearby and cannot drive. I can only use a mobility scooter. My medication is sometimes delivered straight to the post office, so, without this branch, getting my medication will be near impossible.' Leanne Megson, a local carer, said to me: 'For me, it's the convenience of having Australia Post close for access, but, for the elderly or disabled, this is their lifeline. Carers take these people out for a social time, and most clients use the post office to get money out, to pay bills or to bank their money. A lot of clients still write letters. They send cards and purchase stamps there. It's also better for parking than McCrae or Rosebud central, as it has access to flat ground when taking clients out and more disability parking.' As more Australians choose to age at home, nearby postal services are essential not just for sending mail but for staying connected and independent. A good society looks after its older citizens, and that includes maintaining services like Australia Post. Petrie Electorate: Community Services, Health Care 115 10:07 Ms COMER 316551 Petrie I recently had the privilege of attending the Quota Club of Redcliffe's fundraiser supporting The Forgotten Women. This initiative is shining a light on a group too often overlooked: older women experiencing or at risk of homelessness. This organisation supports over 40,000 Queensland women aged 55 and over who are facing financial hardship. These women struggle due to difficulty finding employment, limited to no superannuation and a lack of affordable housing options. The number of these 'hidden homeless' are expected to double by 2036. Our community came together not just to raise money but to raise awareness, because the truth is no woman should spend her later years worrying about where she will sleep at night. I want to thank the Quota Club of Redcliffe for putting a spotlight on this important cause. Together, we're making sure these women are seen not forgotten. I'm proud to be a local in Petrie, a place where thousands of people dedicate their free time to giving back and supporting the community. I recently attended a volunteers thankyou event at the U3A Redcliffe. With over 1,500 members, U3A provides learning and social opportunities to retired or semiretired people over the age of 50. They host over 100 classes, all run by a hardworking team of volunteers committed to connection and ongoing learning. U3A shows us that you're truly never too old to learn. Housing is one of the biggest issues facing families in Petrie. House prices have skyrocketed. In suburbs like Scarborough, Redcliffe and Deception Bay, prices have more than doubled since 2019. In Newport, the median house price has surged past $1.4 million. Home prices are skyrocketing, and renters are struggling. This is not sustainable. It is why I am so glad that we have committed to almost 250 new social and affordable homes, being built in Carseldine, Margate and Deception Bay. Thanks to the Albanese Labor government's Housing Australia Future Fund, we are building Australia's future, where every Australian has a place to call home. Health care is one of my top priorities and is an issue that Petrie locals care deeply about. That's why I'm proud to support the bill to cap medicines on the PBS at $25, beginning 1 January next year. For general patients, medicines haven't been this cheap since 2004. For pension and concession card holders, we've already frozen medicine prices at a maximum of $7.70 until the end of the decade. My community has over 20,000 people on the age pension, and this is changing lives. I've spoken to many locals who go without these vital scripts because of costs. These changes mean people in Petrie can prioritise their health without sacrificing the essentials like food, rent or electricity. NAIDOC Week 116 10:10 Mr LLEW O'BRIEN 265991 Wide Bay Recently, Sharon and I grabbed the grandkids and went for a drive out to Cherbourg to participate in the NAIDOC Week celebrations. In 1904, the Barambah Aboriginal settlement was established as a government reserve for Aboriginal people from across Queensland and New South Wales who were forcibly removed from their communities. It was then renamed Cherbourg in 1931. Housed in dormitories and camps, with rationed food, strict rules and harsh punishments that applied, Aboriginal people were incarcerated and alienated from their families, languages and cultures. Self-governance was achieved in 1986, and the community is now the Cherbourg Aboriginal Shire Council. I acknowledge Mayor Bruce Simpson, his councillors and elders, whom I have worked with since becoming the federal member in 2016. The 2025 NAIDOC theme, 'The Next Generation: Strength, Vision and Legacy', was brought to life by the Cherbourg council's Community Services Department and Youth Advisory Group, who planned and hosted a wonderful community event. The celebrations at Cherbourg included a flag-raising ceremony, a cultural display from the Wakka Wakka Dancers and announcements of the 2025 NAIDOC community awards. I congratulate community award winners Cathryn Sullivan, Richard Gadd, Julian Saltner Jr, Karen Jacobs, Dorothy Bird, Koby Douglas, Sam Murray, Elizabeth O'Chin and the Cherbourg Wellbeing group, who were all recognised for their outstanding contributions to the Cherbourg community. I also had the opportunity to attend a book launch at Cherbourg's Ration Shed Museum, which is the building where, historically, food rations of flour, sugar and tea were distributed to the community. It was a meeting with my friend, Cherbourg elder Eric Law AM, at the Ration Shed Museum that inspired former police officer Tess Merlin to write her historical novel, Red Dirt Blue Lights, which tells the story of a young policewoman working in and around Cherbourg in the 1970s. Eric assisted and advised Tess with cultural input. Red DirtBlue Lights explores the historical relationship between law enforcement and the Cherbourg community, casting a light on the mistreatment and segregation that Aboriginal people endured. The Ration Shed Museum forms part of a cultural precinct that tells the story of Cherbourg's history and celebrates its contemporary achievements. A portion of the sales of the book goes to the Ration Shed Museum. (Time expired) See Differently with the Royal Society for the Blind 116 10:13 Ms CLUTTERHAM 316101 Sturt We often hear the phrase, 'ordinary Australians doing extraordinary things'. I rise today to share the story of Australians who volunteer for See Differently and Australians who benefit from that dedication. See Differently with the Royal Society for the Blind is one of South Australia's oldest charities, founded in 1884. The goal in 1884 was to assist Australians who are blind or vision impaired to achieve the quality of life to which they aspire. That goal has not changed but can only be achieved with the support of volunteers who donate their time and energy to train and develop guide-dog puppies to assist people with vision impairment. See Differently is now South Australia's leading provider of low vision services and products and is headquartered in Gilles Plains, in the electorate of Sturt. See Differently imagines a world where people with low vision, blindness or emotional support needs live with freedom, confidence and purpose, supported by a caring community that values inclusion for all. At a recent ceremony to celebrate the retirement of 10 remarkable guide dogs and the graduation of five freshly minted beautiful and intelligent guide dog puppies—Bixby, Bonnie, Vesper, Cookie and Zinni—I met several vision impaired people who described the freedom, companionship and independence their guide dogs give them, including Mike, a resident of Sturt—and his guide dog, Stirling, who was by his side. Mike, as well as Millie and Sarah, who I also met, described their guide dogs as their best friend, their loyal partner. And they shared that they could not live their lives without them, that they would be lost without them, because a guide dog is a vision impaired person's eyes to the world. They open new doors to independence and opportunity. The guide dogs do not train themselves; they are trained over two years by teams of volunteers to prepare them for life with a vision impaired person or as an assistance dog for veterans. There are currently more than 160 clients living with a See Differently or assistance dog, with approximately 20 new teams graduating each year and around 60 puppies at various stages of training. As well as volunteers, the continuation of this service relies on donations. Ms Valerie Cameron, a resident of Sturt, is one of the largest individual living donors at See Differently with the Royal Society for the Blind. Together with her late husband, Peter, they began donating to See Differently a decade ago. In addition to her significant financial contribution, Valerie attends graduation events, visits the puppies in training and provides baked goods for the See Differently team. In recognition of her financial support, her loyalty and her spirit, Valerie is a life governor of See Differently, and I thank you, Valerie, from the bottom of my heart. King's Birthday Honours and Awards 117 10:17 Mr PASIN 240756 Barker I rise today with great pride and admiration to acknowledge and congratulate a number of outstanding individuals who were acknowledged in the King's Birthday 2025 Honours List. These awards are among the highest form of recognition in our country, celebrating exceptional service, leadership and dedication across a wide range of fields, from community service to health to education to emergency services. Among this year's recipients are individuals whose quiet commitment over many years has uplifted lives and strengthened the fabric of our community. Their contribution often goes unheralded, yet they are deeply felt. These honours serve not only to recognise their personal achievements but also to reflect the values we cherish as a nation—compassion, perseverance and that can-do spirit. I'd particularly would like to recognise the diversity of contributions represented in this year's list, from volunteers who've dedicate years to helping their community to those who have a necessary role and duty in the emergency services and as active members of the correctional services of this nation. Each recipient has left a legacy far greater than themselves. These honours provide a chance to reflect on the incredible potential that lies within each town, each street across my electorate of Barker. I'm constantly humbled by the calibre of people that call the electorate of Barker home, people who see a need and step in, who give their time generously and who make our local area a better place to live, work and raise a family. These honours are an acknowledgement of the great service to others and of devotion to the betterment of society around them. To this end, for those who were formally recognised on the King's birthday for their contribution to the local community and our nation, I want to put on record my thanks and the thanks of a nation. Thank you for the enormous contribution that each of you have made to strengthen the community and uphold our Australian values. With seven out of 730 recipients of the awards this year coming from Barker, it's another example of my electorate punching above its weight—people such as Chris Pfeiffer, AM, for his service to the Lutheran Church and to the community; Maxwell Blacketer, OAM, for his service to the community of Millicent; Mr Leslie Hampel, OAM, for his services to the community of Nuriootpa; Mr David Heard, OAM, for his services to the community through emergency service organisations; Mr David Bridges, ACM, for his dedication to correctional services; to Mr Scott Anderson, ESM, and Mr Lincoln Heading, ESM, for their dedication to emergency services. At a time when good news can feel in short supply, it's especially important that we pause and honour those who lift up others and remind us of what it means to serve. Your dedication will continue to inspire us as many of us try to follow in your well-trodden footsteps. Thank you again. National Tree Day, Organ, Tissue and Blood Donation, EMILY's List Australia 117 10:20 Ms KARA COOK 316537 Bonner This month I joined students and one of my state members, Joe Kelly MP, at the Mt Gravatt State High School to celebrate National Tree Day. National Tree Day is Australia's largest community tree-planting and nature care event encouraging Australians to get involved in environmental activities. In Bonner, we are fortunate to have many active groups supporting our environment and wildlife, including in our schools. Mt Gravatt high school is proud to have an active environmental program, which I participated in firsthand. Thank you to the school captains, Jack and Islam, for showing me the ropes and for their leadership and passion for our local environment, and the killer pythons and red frogs at the end of the planting were a very nice touch. Following the planting, I ran into two of the environmental volunteers at the Mt Gravatt Show, who told me they actually saw a koala that afternoon at the school. It's great that we are securing the koala's future natural environment through our planting. Happy National Tree Day. This week is also DonateLife Week. The week encourages more Australians to get behind organ and tissue donation, which can afford others a second chance at life. I myself am on the Australian Organ Donor Register, and anyone over 16 can register. It only takes a minute via the DonateLife website. I know many people in this place, including me, donate blood or plasma, and I wanted to let the chamber know about the work of fellow Queenslander Kate Fisher as a blood donor advocate. Kate is the author of Milkshakes for Marleigh and is a podcaster who shares the survival stories of recipients of blood donations, including that of her own daughter, Marleigh, who will be reliant on blood donors for the rest of her life. I want to thank Kate for the great work of raising awareness she continues to do and for her ongoing advocacy. We know that four in five Australian say they support donation, but only one in three is registered to be a donor and only one in 30 gives blood. I encourage all members in this place to promote DonateLife Week events and to take some time to register as a donor or perhaps check their registration to see if they are currently a donor. We can all take some time out to donate blood or plasma when we can. It's a small act with life-changing potential. Today I also want to thank EMILY's List Australia for their support. I am proudly wearing their brooch today. They have been instrumental in getting more progressive women elected to parliaments across Australia. It provides practical support, like campaign training, mentoring and fundraising for women, and candidates who are committed to equity, diversity and reproductive rights. Since its founding, it has helped elect more than 300 women, and it has certainly contributed to the 57 per cent female Labor caucus in this parliament today. Thank you, EMILY's List. National Disability Insurance Scheme 118 10:23 Mr PIKE 300120 Bowman The National Disability Insurance Scheme was supposed to be about dignity and choice, an opportunity for Australians with disability to live with greater independence, to access the supports they need and to exercise real control over their own lives. Nobody in this parliament is a stranger to the benefits of the scheme and the challenges that the scheme is putting on the federal budget. NDIS costs are soaring. By 2028 it will cost over $28 billion. The system clearly needs reform to make it financially sustainable, but rather than taking that meaningful reform to tackle those ballooning costs, the Albanese government is going into panic mode. They are swinging the axe not at waste and rorts but at the supports vulnerable Australians rely on. The government has this month slashed travel subsidies for allied health providers, cutting it in half overnight with no consultation and barely any notice. The impact has been immediate and severe, especially for participants on the bay islands in my electorate. They are some of the most vulnerable Australians, now struggling to access the in-person therapy that they need. These changes make it near impossible for therapists to service families on our bay islands, where face-to-face support is the only opportunity for many of these vulnerable families. This isn't fixing the system; it's cutting people off from it. But it hasn't stopped there. They've not only halved travel funding; they've also cut therapy rates and frozen others. In the Redlands, the impact is already hitting home. Local physios and Ots are telling me that they simply can't keep going. OTs haven't had a rate increase in seven years. Physios have just had their rates cut by $10 per hour. At the same time, the Fair Work Commission increased award wages across the sector. Providers are expected to pay more while their incomes are frozen or falling and the costs of fuel, rent, equipment, insurance and admin keep rising. Many highly trained professionals are walking away from the sector altogether. Some are now earning more as support workers. If the government wishes to tackle these challenges, a smarter fix would be to start with the bloated bureaucracy. Right now, providers are drowning in red tape. Unnecessary NDIA paperwork burns them out, exhausts families and wastes taxpayer money. Thousands of reports get written every year; very few get read. We can reduce costs without gutting care, but it will take leadership, not lazy policy. I've written to the minister on this issue, and I received a response yesterday. It dismisses the concerns of my local providers and it leaves them with an ominous warning. It says, 'The 2024-25 annual pricing review reflects the start of a multi-year transition towards more tailored pricing,' so they can expect more of the same—more cuts to come, more vulnerable Australians unable to get support they need, more providers going to the wall. The dream of the NDIS is unfortunately becoming a nightmare for many of the people operating and participating in this system in my electorate. (Time expired) Le Cras, Mr Jack, OAM 119 10:26 Dr ALY 13050 Cowan It's wonderful to see you in the chair, Deputy Speaker Mascarenhas. I would like to pay tribute to a remarkable Australian, a true local legend and someone who has dedicated nearly a century of his life to service both to his country and to our community. I'm speaking, of course, of Jack Le Cras. Jack Le Cras is one of the few living Australians who served in the Royal Australian Navy during the Second World War, and, at just 19 years old, he was on board the USS Missouri when the Japan formally surrendered in 1945, making him one of the few Australians to witness the signing of the Japanese Instrument of Surrender. But Jack's service didn't end there. After the war, he continued to serve, playing a key role in the recovery of prisoners of war in Japan. He's shared stories, some solemn and others full of that characteristic Jack Le Cras humour—like the time he and 47 fellow sailors, each with just two bullets and no water, were sent on foot to secure a Japanese town, only to arrive and find the Americans had already been there for days with bulldozers and trucks. So they put their rivals down in a local shop and spent two hours sightseeing instead. That's Jack—humble, resilient and always with a twinkle in his eye. Jack has also been a driving force behind commemorative services in Cowan for as long as I'd been the member. Every year, he's coordinating, leading, honouring the fallen and reminding all of us why these moments matter. This year, both the City of Wanneroo and the City of Stirling have rightly recognised Jack for his extraordinary contributions. What's Happening magazine, which is a City of Wanneroo local publication, features his story on the front cover. I must say, when I received my copy of What's Happening, the first thing I did was ring Jack Le Cras and say, 'Hey, great photo of the front of What's Happening.' And the City of Stirling hosted a morning tea in Jack's honour. Jack was also awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia, a timely and fitting recognition for a life of dedication, service and community spirit. Sadly, in September, Jack's going to retire from organising all these commemorative events, and he will be sadly missed. But he's marking his 99th birthday and the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II—two huge milestones for Jack. On behalf of the people of Cowan—and I speak for each and every person in Cowan—thank you, Jack, for your service, for your leadership and for the legacy that you're leaving. Jack's story is one that deserves to be told again and again and again, not just because it's remarkable but because it reflects the best of who we are as Australians. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 298800 In accordance with standing order 193, the time for members' constituency statements has concluded. BILLS 119 BILLS Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025 119

Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025

Second Reading 119 10:29 Ms PRICE 249308 Durack I rise to speak on the Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025, legislation that the coalition supports not because it is perfect, not because it is sufficient but because it is necessary. It is necessary because the first operational test of AUKUS is fast approaching. Submarine crews from the United States and the United Kingdom are set to begin rotating through HMAS Stirling from 2027, less than two years away. The preparation must begin now. Housing must be ready well before the first submarine arrives. Timelines are tight, and failure to deliver on this front will send all the wrong signals to our allies. Put simply, this is a test. If we can't adequately host their submariners, why would they have confidence we would be able manage our own? This bill enables Defence Housing Australia to provide accommodation for those allied forces, our closest and most trusted partners as part of the Submarine Rotational Force—West. It is not a symbolic gesture; it is a foundational step in operationalising AUKUS. Without housing, we cannot host; without hosting, we cannot train; and without training, the AUKUS partnership falters at the very first hurdle and we can kiss goodbye a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to create a new nuclear defence maintenance industry in Western Australia. Let's step back and be clear on why this all matters. AUKUS is not a slogan or a branding exercise; it is a hard-nosed strategic partnership designed to keep Australia safe in a rapidly deteriorating security environment. The government itself acknowledges we are facing the most complex and challenging strategic circumstances in 80 years—and they're right. But acknowledgement without action is not enough. The threats are real. The rapid expansion of China's People's Liberation Army, described by the Minister for Defence as the largest conventional military build-up since the Second World War, is reshaping our region. To add to that, this expansion has happened without any strategic reassurances from the Chinese government as to why this is occurring. The first duty of any Australian government must be to keep Australians safe and our nation secure. That duty intensifies in moments like this, particularly when the government itself concedes the situation is dire. This bill, whilst small in scope, touches on a much larger question: are we serious about defending our country? That's where the government's record falls short. Yes, the bill enables Defence Housing Australia to support our allies. Yes, it expands eligibility for housing. And, yes, the coalition supports these changes because, quite frankly, they are necessary for the success of AUKUS. But let us not pretend this is some comprehensive plan, because it is not. There is no new funding in this bill, no increase in housing supply, no structural reform to meet the rise in demand and no funded pipeline to build the homes we need to support this commitment. The bill simply expands Defence Housing's remit but not its resources. This is a serious problem because defence policy is no longer about long-term hypotheticals; it is about immediate readiness and about being able to act, not just talk. Our government should be working to make us as strong as possible as fast as possible, but the blunt reality is that, under this Labor government, Australia's defence posture remains overcooked, underfunded and underdelivering. The coalition has been clear: defence spending must rise. We took to the last election a commitment to increase defence investment to three per cent of GDP within a decade because we believe that's what it takes at a minimum to meet the demand. Increased funding means we will be able to afford to build and operate our own nuclear submarines while not skimping on other defence priorities. Lifting our defence spending to at least three per cent is not an arbitrary figure; it is consistent with what our allies expect from us. Just last month NATO nations committed to lifting core spending to 3.5 per cent of GDP with an additional 1.5 per cent directed to broader security investments by 2035. That's total of five per cent for national resilience. Meanwhile, here in Australia, we remain stuck at just two per cent of GDP under the Albanese government, with no clear pathway to increase the funding. We cannot afford to drift while the rest of the world wakes up to the scale of the challenge. Make no mistake, the United States is watching us closely. The US is currently US$37 trillion in debt. It's not just our region where the US is being asked to do more. The outbreak of war in Ukraine has meant they are being asked to do more in Europe, and as the war in the Middle East remains, more resources are required in that region as well. The Trump administration has made asking allies to bear more of the burden of our collective defence a 'core focus'. The Trump administration has already called on Australia to lift our contribution. AUKUS is under review—we all know that. Our alliance credibility is being tested in real-time. To make matters worse, the failure to lift Defence spending isn't the only counter-productive action from this government. It has been more than 260 days since President Trump won the US election and yet our prime minister has not secured a face-to-face meeting. With previous US leaders this may have been excusable but, as we all know, President Trump is unique. Personal relationships matter to President Trump and are key to securing positive results. Look no further than Labor UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who has met with president Trump several times since his election, and he has secured tariff exemptions for the UK. An opposition member interjecting— Ms PRICE 249308 Yes, good buddies. It's good to see. On top of this failure to meet the President, the Prime Minister's decision to distance Australia from the US alliance with his Curtin oration and his decision to spend almost a week in China, walking the Great Wall and taking selfies with pandas, also sends the wrong message. It is important to get things back on track. This bill and our ability to deliver on it is not a footnote; it is serious signal. It will be read in Washington, London and Beijing alike. If we fail to house the rotational force on time, the message we send is that we simply are not serious and that we cannot be taken seriously—that we are not capable and that we cannot meet even the basic logistical commitments that underpin the once-in-a-lifetime generation agreement, that we're not up to the mission. Let's remember for a moment the significance of this agreement that the Morrison government was able to secure. The United States has shared their nuclear submarine technology with only one nation—the United Kingdom. Providing this technology to us is no small thing. Obtaining our own nuclear submarines in the 2030s will serve as a significant deterrent to future attacks on the Australian homeland. I just would like to digress for a moment to speak in an area that I think we do seek further investment in. As shadow minister for cybersecurity, I want to be clear: Defence spending must also include cyber, because cybersecurity is national security. It's not just about data breaches; it's about protecting critical infrastructure, safeguarding communications, preventing coercion and deterring foreign interference. It is about resilience in the face of adversaries who are already operating inside our networks. The government's own annual cyberthreat report makes it plain: state-sponsored cyber actors are gathering intelligence, exerting coercion and working to pre-position themselves in our allies' critical systems. Should the strategic environment deteriorate further, these same actors will be capable of launching disruptive and even devastating cyberattacks on our country. So when we talk about Defence spending we must expand our thinking to include the spectrum of threats. I note this is one of the aspects our NATO partners are investing in, and they are taking it seriously. Cyber investment is not optional; it is integral to Australia's ability to project strength, deter aggression and respond to modern conflict. If we do not build our own capabilities urgently and credibly, we risk finding ourselves overwhelmed in the opening phase of a crisis. This has been the longstanding position of the coalition, and I would like to take this opportunity to remind the House that our $10 billion commitment through project REDSPICE was significant. This commitment expanded the capabilities of the Australian Signals Directorate to combat sophisticated cyberattacks and expanded our own offensive cyber arsenal. The government says a lot of the right things, indicating that they understand the seriousness of the threat before us; however, our credibility with allies depends not on what was say but on what we do. The United States and the United Kingdom have skin in the game. They are committing real resources, real personnel and real political capital to this agreement. The question that we all have to ask ourselves is: do we? This bill is meant to show that we're ready to host allied forces; that's the point of this bill. But, with no new money, no plan for rapid housing development and no long-term commitment to the enablers of AUKUS, the risk is that we fail before we even begin. We must house these personnel to the same standard we offer our own; that is what alliance credibility demands. We cannot allow a situation where the expansion of DHA's remit ends up crowding out housing for Australian Defence Force personnel and their families, especially in Western Australia, where housing pressures are already acute. I add that the WA government obviously has a role to play in this as well. This must fund additional supply. It must back this bill with real delivery. Otherwise, we are simply expanding the mission without expanding the means, and that is a recipe for failure. That is why the coalition has moved a second reading amendment highlighting many of the issues that I have raised here today. Whilst we support this bill, we do not accept the complacency that surrounds it. Let this be the beginning of serious delivery, not another announcement without action. Australia has never secured peace by standing still. We have never defended our sovereignty simply by hoping for the best and keeping our fingers crossed. Today is no different. In fact, the stakes may be higher than they have ever been. Our adversaries are moving fast. We cannot meet that threat with bureaucracy, complacency and delay. We simply cannot achieve that just with words. Deterrence begins with credible capability, and credible capability begins with investment. This bill before us today touches on all the right things—readiness, sovereignty, agility and people—but it falls short where it matters most, and that word is 'funding'. Legislation without investment is not strategy. The coalition supports this bill. We support our amendment, but we urge the government to match it with funding, urgency and a clear path to get this right. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 299498 The original question was this bill now be read a second time. To this the honourable member for Hume has moved as an amendment that all words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. The immediate question is that the amendment be agreed to. Question unresolved. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 299498 As it is necessary to resolve this question to enable further questions to be considered in relation to this bill, in accordance with standing order 195 the bill will be returned to the House for further consideration. Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) (Repeal) Bill 2025 122

Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) (Repeal) Bill 2025

Second Reading 122 10:43 Ms STANLEY 265990 Werriwa The Albanese Labor government clearly laid out its priorities in the recent election, and it gave our communities a clear choice. One of those priorities was health. We have proudly showed our accomplishments so far and our ambitious plans to make things better. I believe this passion for health resonated with many. Whether you're on your own or have a family, health is always the biggest issue in your life. We are improving all aspects of the health system. Whether it's an occasional doctor's visit or a life-threatening emergency, we want to make sure the system works better for people who use it and need it. We've made a massive $6.1 billion investment in Medicare and started work on the rollout of Medicare urgent care clinics and Medicare mental health centres. My community will benefit from both a Medicare urgent care clinic and a mental health centre, which was an election commitment at the last election. When the government's $1.4 billion investment in urgent care clinics is fully implemented, it's estimated that four out of five Australians will live within a 20-minute drive of one of these clinics. I look forward to being at the opening of the clinic in my electorate soon. Medicare has been one of Labor's greatest achievements, and Australians have entrusted us to protect and strengthen it. Today's bill is part of the government's work to do that. The Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) (Repeal) Bill 2025 will implement the Albanese government's budget commitment to remove fees imposed on the pathology sector for the approval of certain categories of accreditation applications. The removal of these fees is required to address the findings of the 2022 Health Portfolio Charging Review, which identified the fees charged under the Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) Act 1991 which do not align with the Australian Government Charging Framework (2015). In fact, the fees were found to exceed the administrative cost of processing the applications. This bill will repeal the pathology fees act, which specifies the fees that must be paid for the acceptance and approval of the following three categories of accreditation applications: an approved pathology practitioner, an approved pathology authority and an accredited pathology laboratory. The approval of these applications allows the providers of pathology services to claim Medicare benefits for rendering those services. The bill will also make consequential amendments to the Health Insurance Act 1973, which prescribes the payment for fees for acceptance and approval of the applications. The bill provides fee relief and reduces the administrative burden on the pathology sector, as well as retaining the requirements for pathology service providers to meet accreditation requirements. These accreditation obligations will remain unchanged to ensure the quality and safety of pathology services provided under Medicare is maintained. The bill applies retrospectively, with measures taking effect on 1 July 2025. The Albanese government has conducted consultation with the pathology sector in preparing the legislation, including the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia, Australian Pathology and Public Pathology Australia. The bill is in addition to the $509.8 billion of funding for the sector included in this year's budget. This includes a $174 million investment to increase the Medicare rebate for many common pathology tests for the first time in 25 years, as well as adding PCR tests for COVID-19 and other respiratory illnesses to Medicare. This means that Medicare rebates will rise each year for labour-intensive pathology tests. This will support the pathology workforce and allow funding to flow through to increase wages. Technological advances continue to drive down the cost of providing other pathology tests. As new technologies get cheaper over time, they will become more commonplace. We know Australians want to see pathology services continue to be bulk-billed. I spoke with many constituents in my own community who've expressed concerns at the prospect of rising costs. That is why it is good that less than one per cent of tests provided outside hospitals are not bulk-billed, and this investment will ensure that it stays that way. Our priority is to ensure that all Australians have access to affordable health care, and that it is why we are continuing to invest in strengthening Medicare. I commend the bill to the House. 10:49 Ms FRANCE 270198 Dickson I rise in support of the Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) (Repeal) Bill 2025. Medicare is Labor's heart, but it is also my heart. Medicare saved my life and gave my Henry the very best chance of surviving leukemia. My family has benefited from bulk-billed pathology over the last decade, which would probably amount to many thousands of dollars that we didn't have to pay upfront. The Albanese Labor government is committed to delivering more bulk-billed services—not just more GP visits but also more pathology, diagnostic imaging like MRIs and more—and we want to ensure that the current bulk-billed health services continue. Our priority is to ensure that all Australians have access to affordable health care. That's why we are continuing to invest in strengthening Medicare. This bill delivers fee relief to the pathology sector, in addition to the $509 million of funding for the sector included in the budget. This will ensure there is no gap and that services will continue to be bulk-billed. We're investing $174 million to increase the Medicare rebate for many common pathology tests for the first time in 25 years, and we're adding PCR tests for COVID-19 and other respiratory illnesses to Medicare. Medicare rebates will rise each year for labour-intensive pathology tests. This will support the pathology workforce and allow funding to flow through to increased wages. We know Australians want to see pathology services continue to be bulk-billed. Less than one per cent of tests provided outside of hospitals are not bulk-billed at the moment. This investment will help ensure it stays that way. Labor will always— A division having been called in the House of Representatives— Sitting suspended from 10:51 to 11:06 Ms FRANCE 270198 I may as well say a couple of lines again because I just love them so much! Medicare is not only Labor's heart but also mine. I have had probably thousands of pathology tests over the past 10 years. My family in general has had thousands of bulk-billed pathology tests over the last 10 years. That's one of the reasons this bill is so incredibly important: we need to continue the bulk-billing of pathology services. Labor will always protect and strengthen Medicare. We're committed to more and better health services, no matter where you live. This is a stark comparison to those opposite. Let's not forget that, in their first term of office, the previous coalition government cut bulk-billing payments for pathology and diagnostic imaging, to make patients pay more. Labor is investing in pathology and diagnostic imaging. In my electorate of Dickson, more people in Strathpine now have access to more MRI scans funded through Medicare. The people of Dickson should only need their Medicare card, not their credit card—and that's what we are working towards—to receive the health care they need. That is exactly what our government is working to deliver. This licence is saving locals who get their scans done in Strathpine, and it will give patients in Dickson more choice on where to get their scan. Making MRIs more affordable is another way the Albanese government is strengthening Medicare. This bill relates to the fees imposed on the pathology sector for certain categories of pathology applications. It specifies the fees which must be paid for the acceptance and approval of an approved pathology practitioner, an approved pathology authority and accredited pathology laboratory applications. The approval of these applications allows the providers of pathology services to claim Medicare benefits for delivering those services. The 2022 Health Portfolio Charging Review identified that the fees set against each of these application categories have not been reviewed or changed since the pathology fees act came into force a very long time ago. This bill repeals the pathology fees act. It will resolve this misalignment and provide fee relief, in addition to reducing the administrative burden for the pathology sector. The consequential amendments included in this bill remove all references to the payment of fees for these application categories from 1 July 2025. Accreditation obligations associated with these applications will remain unchanged, thus maintaining the quality and safety of pathology services provided under Medicare. As I have said, the Albanese Labor government is laser focused on strengthening Medicare. We are delivering more bulk-billing for all Australians. We are making the single largest investment in Medicare ever. This will deliver an additional 18 million bulk-billed GP visits every year so Australians can see a bulk-billing GP. We're opening more Medicare urgent care clinics. We're expanding and growing our network of Medicare urgent care clinics, opening an additional 50 clinics. Four in five Australians will live within a 20-minute drive of a Medicare urgent care clinic under Labor, and I should mention our amazing Murrumba Downs Medicare Urgent Care Clinic. I've visited the facility many times. So many locals have gone there with their kids and family members, and it's avoided a trip to the emergency department. They love it. We're making medicines even cheaper. Labor is providing cost-of-living relief to millions of Australians by making medicines cheaper. From 1 January 2026, the maximum cost of a prescription for a PBS medicine will be cut from $31.60 to $25. This makes a huge difference, particularly for people with chronic illnesses. Cutting that fee will make a huge difference to how much they spend on their medicines and other things over the year. We're hiring more doctors and nurses. Labor is growing the health workforce to deliver more doctors and nurses than ever before. This includes having the largest GP training program in Australian history and hundreds of scholarships for nurses and midwives to extend their skills and qualifications. We're investing more than $790 million in women's health, something I am incredibly proud of. And I tell you what, at every door I knocked on that was answered by a mum or a young woman, I talked about our women's healthcare package, and people overwhelmingly said, 'Thank you so much.' Reducing the cost of women's health is incredibly important to me and my electorate. Labor will provide Australian women with more choice and better treatment at a lower cost, making contraceptives cheaper and funding more treatments for menopause. We're helping Australian women suffering from endometriosis and complex gynaecological conditions have access to longer specialist consultations covered under Medicare. We're supporting women's health by opening endometriosis and pelvic pain clinics. Labor will open an additional 11 clinics for a total of 33 clinics across every state and territory. This will mean that Australian women can access the care they need closer to home. All 33 clinics will be supported to extend their focus to also provide specialist support for menopause and perimenopause. We're investing in free mental health support for Australian parents. New and expectant Australian parents will get free, personalised mental health support thanks to a $16.7 million investment by the Albanese Labor government to open another eight perinatal mental health centres around the country. I should quickly talk about our Medicare mental health centres that we're setting up across the country. This is going to be a game changer for people who need immediate mental health support. They can walk straight into a clinic and get the help they need. I'm really pleased that we're going to have two in my electorate of Dickson. I'm really looking forward to those opening up and being able to support our community with mental health services. Overall, Labor is delivering more bulk-billing services across the board for all Australians. I'm so pleased to support this bill, which will mean that pathology services continue to be bulk-billed for most Australians. 11:15 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein I rise to support the bill. It's wonderful to be here supporting legislation that's looking specifically at the challenges of the pathology sector, because it's so important for making sure that Australians get access to the health services they need and, of course, for making sure Australians are in a position to get the tests at the time and stages of their lives when they need them. We know a huge number of health services are coming under increasing stress and demand as a consequence of an ageing population. The consequence of that is, of course, that more Australians are living longer. We all agree that this is a wonderful thing. The trade-off from that is that costs continue to escalate in the context of the health sector. In particular, the costs of structures are shifting more towards management of chronic conditions. As a consequence of that, people need more testing to make sure that they're keeping up with their existing medical conditions, managing things like medicine regimes and working more and more with their doctors. That's why primary care is such an important part of facilitating healthcare services where people need support and assistance in community rather than escalating things up to tertiary hospitals and, of course, why it's so important to have access to services within the community, including pathology testing. We have a massive gap in Australian society right now. We have relatively well serviced electorates in inner urban areas—particularly those that are affluent—but so many communities are less well off, particularly once you get outside of capital cities and into rural and regional areas. Access to health services quickly becomes quite limited and often dire. I want to congratulate the new member for Grey on his first speech last night, where he talked explicitly on the limitations of access to health services once you're outside of capital cities. It's something I'm very mindful of and something that I know the member for Riverina, who is here in the chamber with me, is also very concerned about. When we're talking about limitations on access to health service in rural and regional areas—and, I might clarify, often in lower socioeconomic parts of capital cities—you have inequity in provision of health services, which ultimately extends out to diminishing quality of life, particularly towards the later stage of your life. In addition, there are limits on services, which means you spend more time waiting. There is inequity in accessing and getting the best healthcare outcomes. This is something we take very seriously, Deputy Speaker Boyce. I know it is very important in your electorate as well. To understand that, you have to understand what happens outside of capital cities. That is often a challenge for the current government, which has taken a casual disinterest in health care outside of capital cities in this country. One of the limitations of services outside of capital cities is pathology centres and pathology services. You want to go into remote Indigenous communities and look at the limitations they have to accessing pathology services. The Royal Flying Doctor Service has to deal with this all the time. They literally have to fly into communities to get blood tests, then fly out, then send back medicine later to be able to help support people managing their conditions. This is a big problem that has other big costs and problems that flow down from it that then mean, because of the inefficiencies of access to these types of services, like pathology, more of the health budget is consumed where it shouldn't be. Of course, we also know that this is a much bigger story about the limitations of health care under this government and, frankly, under the state Labor governments. Victoria is a classic example. We basically have the complete collapse of our hospital system. If you go to a public hospital, you are increasingly concerned about whether you are going to go in and be at risk of co-morbidities or other conditions and whether you'll get into certain types of services, particularly what is deemed elective surgery. I hear from my South Australian colleagues that, despite all the promises from the Malinauskas Labor government, their health services are a complete bin fire despite the promises that they were going to fight ramping and everything else. Nothing has gone in the right direction. It's like the broader conversation around the economy under this government, but that's getting to another topic. They you get to the federal government and say, 'Okay, the states are failing—the state Labor governments are failing on access to tertiary services. Let's go to primary care and what needs to be provided by the Albanese Labor government.' They like to crow about certain urgent care clinics et cetera. They hold them up and say, 'This is the perfect answer to everything,' but the reality is it's part of—at best—a bandaid solution to a much bigger problem. The Prime Minister is very fond of it—he likes that Medicare card. He likes to bring it out in question time and show it around. It like a little totem that he thinks gives him some sort of license, or magic powers, like he designed the system. Then, all of a sudden, he can take full ownership of it and he wants to own this conversation. Actually, we have seen a reality under this government. We have seen an 11 per cent reduction in the number of people using bulk-billing under this government. It's not about what I want or what you want or what the opposition wants. It's about the government's own data to reflect on the number of Australians using Medicare, and when they go and say, 'I need to access health services,' often in urgent circumstances—often, frankly, when they're facing other challenges in their lives, like the cost-of-living pressure. They go to the supermarket are already having to make a decision of whether they can afford what's in the trolley. Then they've got kids who are sick. They're going to their local doctor, and the answer from the government is, 'You should be able to get it bulk-billed.' But access to fully bulk-billed doctors is quite limited, and despite the promises of the government, since the Albanese government was elected we have seen a decline in the volume of people who are successful in getting things bulk-billed. There's an 11 per cent decline. This is the tragic reality. The promise and the reality are completely different things. Now, 45 per cent of Australians are paying more out of their own pocket to see a GP than they were when we were last in government. It doesn't matter how many times the Prime Minister held it up—he can hold it up 45 per cent more times—it's not going to change that. It could hold it up 100 per cent more times in question time if he wanted to; it doesn't change the outcome. The reality is, having a Medicare card and being able to use your Medicare card are slightly different things, and the Prime Minister hasn't quite figured that bit out. That's part of the limitations of this government. They like to talk, they like to scare, they like to campaign and they like the politics, but they don't like the governing bit so much. That's what we're now living with and that's what Australians are living with. Australians have only one of two choices: either deny themselves access to health services, and that has a long, downstream consequence, or turn up and pay with their Medicare card. The promise they were sold does not match the reality that they live. We know more and more GP clinics are not bulk-billing. We've seen a decline in the number of those, so Australians are finding it harder and harder. The irony is the people they claim to want to represent—which are those from lower socio-economic communities—are the ones most badly hit. We need to be realists. We need to start being honest with the Australian community about where our health system is. Once you start being honest and know where you are, you can at least have a conversation on how we're going to fix it. Unfortunately, the government isn't prepared to have that conversation because they think the answer is a bit of plastic they can wave around in question time. That is not the answer to the problem that Australia's healthcare services face. Without meaningful support or meaningful outcomes, when you go to use it, it's like with bankcards. Some of the members over the other side have those cards—I've seen them in your wallets sometimes. These days you actually get them on your phone as well—you can tap them at the supermarket or any other retail outlet. You tap them. And if you don't actually have the money that sits behind them, they don't work. There's this thing called 'declined'. You've heard of that, member for Riverina? Mr TIM WILSON IMW You have! That's kind of how Australians are engaging with Medicare right now. They go to a doctor and say: 'I would like to redeem this card, the plastic one. The Prime Minister holds it up in question time! I saw him on television! I saw him do it on television, so it must be good, because if the Prime Minister says it's going to work, it's going to work.' But, of course, they go and do the effective equivalent of a tap-and-go at their local GP clinic, and the clinic says, 'Here's the top-up payment—the co-payment.' And they say: 'But the Prime Minister said I wasn't going to have to do that. The Prime Minister said in question time that it was going to work.' In any other profession you'd say that was misleading and deceptive conduct. You'd be off to the ACCC. But it's not so for this government. Tap-and-go on Medicare doesn't work, and he's getting away with it because so many of his new Labor colleagues are actually deeply afraid to challenge this Prime Minister and the Minister for Health and Ageing for their limitations and failings. That is the political reality. Going through all the first speeches of all the new Labor members, as I have been doing, is always an interesting and fascinating insight. I haven't gotten to all the Labor members who were in the last parliament, but I'll get there—don't worry. They appreciate that—that's right! I know the Labor members opposite appreciate that, because I've said to the Labor members opposite, 'I will send you a copy of mine in return.' But a lot of them talked about health care and Medicare in the process. They talk about how it's so important and how it's part of why they became Labor. I have some sympathy for their commitment to it, but the problem we've got is that what they're delivering is not living up to it. When you can't deliver what you promise, the public starts to lose trust and faith in our institutions. That's one of the reasons the Prime Minister has been vetting and vetoing all of these new Labor members' first speeches, taking out anything about policy or detail that makes them interesting. The Prime Minister has this obsession with control. He wants to control everything. He wants to control his government. He has all these new Labor members of parliament, and it makes him feel like he's unlimited in his power. But there is a reality that sits behind that which means that he simply has no capacity to go on and deliver. He's not getting the feedback loop, including from some Labor members who are qualified general practitioners themselves, who would knock on the door and say: 'Prime Minister, I know you keep flashing your Medicare card around the House of Representatives in question time. I know you're proud of it, and I get it—we all believe in Medicare and its role in the healthcare system. We've got a problem. People are going to their GP clinic, and it's not being redeemed. People are going there, and the clinics are asking where their credit card is so they can access the services.' I know it must be very uncomfortable for Labor's new members to have that conversation. It's intimidating; it's a big office, and it's flashy. They've decorated it. They've put lots of nice flags in there and that sort of thing. It's always nice the first time you go in there. I do understand that as well. But part of the challenge of being a member of parliament is that sometimes you have to speak truth to power, and when the Prime Minister is misleading the public, you've got to say, 'PM, it's not right.' The people paying the price on the ground are Australians who can't access health services and are having to make choices between that, their rent, feeding their kids and, of course, making sure they put food on the table. All I can implore is that, in considering this legislation, the Prime Minister wakes up and the Labor backbench stand up, because we need a health system that will actually meet the challenges of the future of this country, and we're not getting it under the timidity, lack of ambition and, frankly, lack of courage of the Labor members opposite. 11:28 Dr REID 300126 Robertson A lack of courage! What a fascinating statement—a lack of courage. Can I just say that it was the courage of this Albanese Labor government that invested in Medicare after 10 years of Liberal-National neglect. They decimated our universal healthcare system, making it harder and more expensive for people to see a doctor, whether that be to access a GP, pathology, imaging or an emergency department. They chronically underfunded our nation's hospitals through the national health agreement. It was an absolute travesty. I still vividly remember—this is pre COVID—standing in the emergency department, looking out through the window, and there was a TV in the waiting room. And I remember the former member for Cook, the then prime minister of Australia, continuing to parrot the lines that the Liberal-National government were continuing to invest in primary health care, in the health care of Australians and in Medicare. I looked around in that waiting room and I looked around at the sick people who couldn't access health care because it had been chronically underfunded, and that was part of a tipping point for me. That was part of a moment that—like the member for Goldstein just said—made me a Labor MP. That made me put up my hand, doorknock tens of thousands of houses, talk to constituents right across my electorate, talk to people in Dobell and in Shortland—the great Central Coast region of New South Wales—and say, 'Hey, this isn't good enough.' People are waiting too long in EDs. People can't see a GP. People can't get access to the pathology services and imaging services that they need to live long, happy, healthy and productive lives. And that's what made me run for parliament. When we heard the first speeches of some of these amazing Labor members who sit in this chamber here today, they talked about the importance of Medicare, because it is important. It is important. Medicare is important, and bulk-billing is the beating heart of Medicare; it is the beating heart of Australia. It's what allows us to do the things that we want to do and not have to worry that going to the doctor, going to the hospital or having surgery is going to bankrupt us and send us onto the street. That's why Medicare exists. It's not just about Medicare. The whole package of health care that this Albanese Labor government has brought forward in both the 47th parliament and now the 48th parliament is one for the history books. It is fantastic. We are looking at making sure that pathology and imaging services are more widely available for the Australian people. But let's talk about urgent care. If you're too sick for the GP but not sick enough for the ED, now you've finally got somewhere to go, and it's bulk-billed. I can only imagine what those opposite would do if they decided to set up some sort of network like that. You would be paying for it and you would be paying deep into your pockets for a privatised health system, and that is just not good enough. Let's move on from urgent care; let's talk about the tripling of the bulk-billing incentive. I know that, following the tripling of the bulk-billing incentive—which is now going to be expanded to every Medicare card holder to make sure that we can improve access to bulk-billing right across this country so that people can access a GP—preventive healthcare is important. It stops people going to the emergency department in the middle of the night. We treat the hypertension. We treat the hypercholesterolaemia. That stops it from becoming a myocardial infarction. That stops it from becoming a CVA. That stops people from becoming critically unwell and needing those tertiary- or quaternary-level services. That's what general practice and preventive care is all about. I support our GPs on the Central Coast and right across Australia, and I know that the Albanese Labor government supports our general practitioners, through the tripling of that incentive. There is one more thing I want to talk about that I think is important and that has been chronically underfunded for decades, to be frank, by governments of every persuasion, but particularly by the former Liberal-National coalition government. That is investment in women's health care. Investment in women's health care is so important, not just for the fact that women make up half the population of Australia but for the fact that the chronic underfunding of women's health care has meant time off work and significant morbidity and, in some cases, mortality in the female population. That's just not good enough. Out-of-control misdiagnosis or delayed diagnosis of endometriosis impacts lives. It impacts lives and it impacts families, and, quite frankly, the chronic underfunding of women's health care under the previous government was just not good enough. It took our prime minister, our cabinet and our majority-female Labor government to take a stand and to say, 'That's not good enough, and we need to invest in women's health care.' It's the endometriosis clinics. It's the pelvic pain clinics. It's access to contraceptive options. It's making sure that, when women see the GP, they can actually see the GP for a timeframe wherein they can actually address the issues that affect women in their lives and affect women in their health care journey. And I believe that is really, really important. Locally, on the Central Coast, there are those federal policies, but there are also the local policies. We are investing millions of dollars in our maternity services on the Central Coast, making sure that, after the closure of our private hospital, women have choice about where they can give birth, making sure they don't have to go to Newcastle, making sure they don't have to go to Sydney. They can give birth in our public hospital, Gosford Hospital. We're making sure there is up-to-date, world-class infrastructure in our maternity and birthing units. We're making sure that our gynaecology and our colposcopy clinics are adequately funded and making sure that people have access in our public hospitals to world-class, world-leading obstetrics and gynaecology services. I'll make a final point, on what has often been a taboo subject in Australia: mental health. Under this government, in the last parliament and now in this parliament, we are making sure that we are talking about mental health and that we are investing in mental health. That is a really important part of the healthcare journey of a patient. My good friend the assistant minister and member for Dobell, Emma McBride, along with the broader health caucus, and the Prime Minister and every Labor member in the parliament have backed the introduction of the Medicare mental health centres. These will be walk-in clinics where you can access psychologists, where you can access counsellors, where you can talk to people—bulk-billed, importantly—about your mental health issues and either have them addressed onsite or be referred to a specialist pathway. Ultimately, that will reduce the disease burden not just on yourself but also on our society more generally. For the member for Goldstein to come in here and talk about us underinvesting in Medicare, despite everything that we did in the 47th Parliament and despite everything we are doing now—one of the first pieces of legislation this fortnight was to cut the cost of medicines. As Minister Butler, the Minister for Health and Ageing, continues to say, bulk-billing is the beating heart of Medicare, and Medicare is the beating heart of Australia. It truly is. I know, as the Labor member for Robertson, I will continue to support universal health care. I will continue to support cheaper medicines. I will continue to support the expansion of women's health care and access to health care. I will continue to support our mental health services. I will continue to support our public hospitals. These are important not just to the Central Coast but to New South Wales and Australia more broadly. 11:37 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina That was a good speech by the member for Robertson. I commend him on many aspects of it and acknowledge the fact that he said one of the reasons why he became a Labor candidate was because of the lack of services within his local area. I'll just point out this: if he came to some of those rural and regional areas where there is a severe lack of services, he might well have become a Nationals candidate, because we all support our own electorates. We all stick up for those people who send us to Canberra to do a job. I also acknowledge the fact that he is still working in his local hospital and I appreciate that. It must be very good for the patients of Robertson, the electorate he represents. And I acknowledge the fact that he talked about mental health being a taboo topic. For many, many years it was, particularly amongst men. On 11 July, we had the member for Dobell, the Assistant Minister for Rural and Regional Health, the minister who assists the Minister for Health and Ageing with the prevention of suicide, in Wagga Wagga. She was attending the local headspace, a walk-in clinic. She made some announcements that were very well appreciated. That walk-in clinic is open to people seeking to obtain the services that they desire. Particularly for regional people who are doing it tough, that's a welcome addition. I acknowledge the good work Assistant Minister McBride is doing in rural and health. It is so very important. The member for Robertson mentioned the endometriosis and pelvic pain clinics. They were also mentioned by the member for Dickson, who spoke previously on the bill. We'd very much like one in Wagga Wagga for the Riverina. That is an important topic. I note Dr Freelander is in the chamber; I know how important it is for the western suburbs seat of Macarthur that he represents—how important it is for him—too. Now, we talk about urgent care clinics. The problem with urgent care clinics is that they have been placed in areas of political necessity for the government, not necessarily where they are most needed. If you look in rural, regional and, particularly, remote Australia, people don't have the ability to just walk in, produce a Medicare card and receive the services that they so desperately desire. All too often, particularly in remote Australia, it's, 'When in pain, catch the plane.' There's no treatment available there. People actually have to go to a capital city to get the treatment they need. I hear this great clamour from Labor members—and I appreciate we're severely outnumbered at the moment—about cheaper medicines and cheaper scripts. The fact remains that the government had to be dragged kicking and screaming to come to the table to sign the latest accord in the pharmacy situation. We all remember the white coats when the Pharmacy Guild were in the public galleries complaining about Minister Butler's lack of empathy, care and concern for their needs. In fact, for many hundreds of those country centres, they faced the prospect of losing—and it was a very real threat—their only health professional in town. That was the local, friendly pharmacist—the local, friendly chemist—who for years had provided services because they didn't have a doctor, they didn't have an urgent care clinic or an endometriosis or pelvic pain clinic and they didn't have a headspace. They were doing it all on their own. And, all of a sudden, when the coalition—it was the Nationals, in fact—said, 'Enough's enough; we have to support our pharmacists,' we saw some action. I've heard members of Labor in their first speeches talking about what Labor's doing as far as funding training for rural medical students. Well, that came under the Nationals. That is probably the legacy that I leave, because I know that the negotiations I had with then prime minister Turnbull— Mr McCORMACK 219646 Thank you, Dr Freelander. I had negotiations with then prime minister Malcolm Turnbull to get that Murray-Darling network of rural medical schools—so very important. They're in Orange, Mildura, Shepparton, Wagga Wagga, Dubbo—the list goes on. Just take Wagga Wagga, for example, which each year is providing 30 new doctors the opportunity to train from start to finish in a rural setting. And we all know that, if you train doctors from start to finish in a rural setting, where there are unique challenges and unique opportunities for rural medicine, such as snake bites and road trauma that you don't see in the middle of capital cities, where some of the sandstone universities are providing clinical and medical schools—you do see that in regional settings. It is providing the hope and the opportunity for those young people in Wagga Wagga with 30 places each year. I know that, with the big, new, shiny buildings that are being erected and finished, there is the opportunity under that $94.5 million program to have more students come on board, because heaven knows we need more doctors. This particular bill, the Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) (Repeal) Bill 2025, removes the fees imposed on the pathology sector for certain categories of pathology applications. It responds to the findings of the 2022 Health Portfolio Charging Review by doing a couple of things—firstly, addressing the misalignment of fees charged under the pathology fees act with the charging framework and, secondly, providing fee relief and reducing the administrative burden on the pathology sector. You're not going to get the coalition complaining about that. The opposition leader has said we will certainly divide on bills where we must, but, when there's good policy put forward, we'll agree with it. But we do get this feeling from the Labor members—and I appreciate that Medicare started under Labor—that they think they're the only party for health provision in this country. And Labor is not. I appreciate that the urgent care clinics are great—good luck if you have one—but GP bulk-billing fell from 88 per cent to 77 per cent and there have been 40 million fewer GP bulk-billed GP visits in the last year alone under the Albanese government. That issue is particularly exacerbated in rural and regional areas, where you don't have the luxury of having a number of GPs. We have quality GPs. We just don't have the quantity of GPs. When questioned about bulk-billing rates and the proliferation thereof, Minister Butler came out with this famous quote during the last term of government. He said: 'If you can't get a doctor to bulk-bill you, don't worry about that appointment. Pick the phone up and get the next doctor and see if they'll bulk-bill you.' That might be all well and good in the leafy suburbs of Adelaide, but, I'll tell you what, when you're out in regional Australia, you take the first doctor's appointment you can get, and usually that doctor's appointment is weeks down the track, because they're just not available like they are in capital cities. That is a truism. I'm not exaggerating. I'm not catastrophising. I'm not being alarmist. It is the truth. We appreciate what our doctors do. My family doctor, Dr Ayman Shenouda, is a member of the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners. He has done a power of good for country doctors. Not only has he tried to lift immunisation rates and been a spokesperson for GPs generally; he has also provided wonderful health care at Glenrock. GPs in Glenrock, by and large, bulk-bill, but a lot of practices in and around Wagga Wagga and in and around the Riverina do not. Australians are now paying 45 per cent more of the cost to see a GP from their own pocket, and out-of-pocket costs have literally reached the highest level on record. So it's all well and good for Labor members to come in and spruik about Medicare. It is the brainchild of Labor. I appreciate that. But the data that I just talked about—the decrease in bulk-billing from 88 per cent to 77 per cent, the 40 million fewer bulk-billed GP visits and Australians paying 45 per cent more of the cost to see a GP—are from the government's own national accounts. It shows that more Australians are having to use that little green and yellow card that the Prime Minister is so fond of pulling out in question time and in press conferences. He can do that as often as he likes. It doesn't take away the fact that more Australians are having to use their credit card along with their own Medicare card. They're being charged the highest amount of out-of-pocket costs on record. Despite Labor's protestations to the opposite, we are seeing more Australians having to pay more in a cost-of-living crisis. The Prime Minister told Australians that under Labor all you'll need is your Medicare card, not your credit card. But that's not the lived experience of so many Australians, particularly Australians who live in rural, regional, and especially remote areas. The Department of Health's incoming government brief, released under FOI, estimates that a quarter—23 per cent—of GP clinics across Australia will not bulk-bill, despite all the Labor government's promises. Doctors need to make money. I appreciate that. They run clinics. They're under strain as well, particularly in regional settings, but so too are people in the cost-of-living crisis, a cost-of-living crisis that has worsened under the Labor government. It is appalling that this Prime Minister is willing to mislead Australians about only needing the Medicare card. That's not correct. Clearly he would have known about the health department's data before waving that Medicare card around. In an election situation, when people are looking to cast their vote, they'll listen to that and see that little grab on the news, and that's what they'll go with. But the true reality is that people are still having to pay, shell out their own money, to see a GP. And, of course, there's a coalition, as you'd expect, opposition— Dr Freelander 265979 So many people don't pay to see their GP—80 per cent. Mr McCORMACK 219646 On those figures, Dr Freelander, 20 per cent are. The Prime Minister is making out as though everybody can show their Medicare card and that will be the only sufficient cost. It's simply not right. We can agree to disagree on that one. I respect you; I've got the highest respect for you, I know you do a wonderful job and your advocacy for health outcomes and better medical provisions is second to none in this place. I acknowledge that and put that on the record. But, in this regard, the situation is that people are having to pay, and pay dearly, for their medical treatment. Often they're families and people who can't afford it, but they have to do it. Funding into Medicare—this is an important point to make, too—increased every single year under the former coalition government. It went from $18.6 billion under Labor in 2012-13—they were the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd years, and I remember them well; I was in parliament at that time—to more than $30 billion in 2021-22. I appreciate that some of these figures are exponential and some of these just go with the rising cost of things, relative to where they were, but Medicare bulk-billing was higher under the coalition. Bulk-billing rose consistently across our entire term of government from 2013 to 2022. It rose to 86 per cent before the COVID-19 pandemic and it was at a record high of 88 per cent when we left government in May 2022. In the coalition's last year in government, $167.2 million in free GP services was delivered—$61 million more than the previous Labor government. Those statistics speak for themselves. They're on the record. I'm not making them up; they're right. We want to see people able to live in a happy, healthy and safe society. Whilst I appreciate that this legislation to remove the fees imposed on the pathology sector for certain categories of pathology applications will be supported, and it's good, the fact remains that there are a lot of fees and costs relating to seeing a doctor—if you're lucky enough to have one—that are being imposed on the Australian public. No amount of the Prime Minister waving a Medicare card in question time or anywhere else is going to take away from that fact. 11:52 Dr FREELANDER 265979 Macarthur I acknowledge the work that the member for Riverina has done in rural health—together with his former colleague Mark Coulton, the former member for Parkes, who retired at the end of the last parliament—in trying to improve access to care for people living in rural, regional and remote areas. I would like to go back to the legislation before us at the moment, the Health Insurance (Pathology) (Fees) (Repeal) Bill 2025. I thank the Minister for Health and Ageing and the Assistant Minister for Health and Aged Care for the work they've done on this legislation, which was presented to the previous parliament but was not able to go through the parliament. It has come up again now and will be passed in the near future. This legislation demonstrates that the government is working at all levels of the healthcare sector to provide fee relief not just to patients but to businesses involved in providing health care. In addition to reducing the administrative burden on the pathology sector, this bill will save costs and improve the efficiency of our pathology sector. This follows on from the findings of the 2022 Health Portfolio Charging Review, which identified that fees set against application categories had not been reviewed or changed since the pathology fees act came into force almost 40 years ago. These fees were arbitrarily set between $500 and $2,500 in 1991. The consequential amendments included in this bill remove all references to the payment of fees for these application types from 1 July 2025. In line with this intended commencement date, provisions have been included to allow the refund of fees collected between 1 July 2025 and the commencement date of this bill where the applicant's approval has come into force on or after 1 July 2025. To preserve a high level of confidence in the accuracy of pathology testing Australia provided under Medicare, the administrative requirements, including accreditation obligations, will remain unchanged. I will talk a little bit about the pathology sector. The work of our pathologists is often behind the scenes. Pathologists are not at the forefront of everyone's daily lives owing to the unique and important role that they have in health care. They range from anatomical pathologists, performing postmortems on people to try to find out why they may have died, to people analysing bodily fluids to bacteriological examination—microscopic examination et cetera—of body tissue and cells with a histopathologist. There are haematologists to ascertain what causes disease and the ways in which to heal them. There are also the bacteriologists, who are able to tell us which particular organisms cause illness and how they should be treated. We also have virologists, who can identify viruses that have caused human illness—most commonly, of course, respiratory viruses. Everyone is now very familiar with the PCR testing that really came to prominence in the pandemic, but it's important to know we were doing PCR testing in children for respiratory viruses for almost 15 years before the pandemic. Pathologists do a lot of work behind the scenes and provide us with the information we need to treat our patients. As a paediatrician, I relied very heavily on our pathology sector to help me in the diagnosis of a whole range of illnesses, from leukaemia through to sickle-cell disease, a number of different haematological problems, the diagnosis of meningitis using bacteriological specimens and also histopathologists who tell us what is causing certain pathology in kidneys, liver, the brain et cetera. So pathologists are really important to us, and it's very important to note that Australia has one of the best pathology systems in the world, provided through the Medicare system to our patients and the hospital system. We rely on them to be well-trained, we rely on them to be very accurate and we rely on them to be very timely in the results they give to us as practising physicians. It's very important in cancer medicine, in paediatrics—in virtually every part of the health system, we rely on our efficient, well-accredited and accurate pathology system to lead us through dealing with the multiple diseases that can affect humans. Really, at no other stage in human existence have we so relied on our pathologists to give us the accurate information we need to manage our patients, and that's particularly true in paediatrics. There is now an exploding field of genetics and genomics where we are using our pathologists to give us the answers to some of the disorders that have plagued human existence since it began. I rely on my pathologists and my geneticists to give me the information I need to talk to my patients. It is very important that we maintain an efficient and highly sensitive system in an accurate way. This is why accreditation is important. It's important to make regular accreditation something that happens all the time to our pathology providers. Some of them, of course, are in the public system. Most major public hospitals have public pathology providers. They are very highly skilled, particularly in things like cancer medicine. They work long hours. They sometimes work under huge pressure to get accurate diagnoses as quickly as possible. We rely on them also to provide services to our patients in a cost-effective and efficient manner. We have private providers who are now providing pathology services around the world. I had a small involvement with Sonic Healthcare in the very beginning of their existence, almost 40 years ago. Sonic pathology now provides pathology services in the United States, in Europe, in Asia and particularly in the South Pacific. They are a fantastic company, and I'd like to give them and their CEO, Colin Goldschmidt, a shout-out because I think they've provided a wonderful service around the country over many years. At no stage in recent memory have pathologists been more front-and-centre since the pandemic. They really did lift their game and provide diagnostic certainty to Australian physicians dealing with people with COVID and other respiratory illnesses—at levels unprecedented in my lifetime. I thank them very much for their skills and their tireless efforts during that time. This legislation will make their accreditation cheaper for the pathologists, cheaper for the companies, and much more efficient and more streamlined. In my electorate of Macarthur there are a range of pathology clinics, all of whom are excellent and all of whom provide daily diagnostic tests to my constituents in a very accurate manner. It is really important. I've seen poor pathology results in some places that have led to misdiagnoses of conditions like childhood leukaemia. Unless you have a well-trained pathologist to look at a blood film, it can sometimes be very difficult to identify the leukaemic cells. It can lead to delays in diagnoses and occasionally to death. Inaccurate bacteriological management can lead to misdiagnoses of meningitis, for example, and that can have serious complications. So, even though our pathologists are in the background, I'm very proud of the work they do and I think that it is really important for a world-class health system like Australia to have such wonderful pathology providers. We are very, very lucky. Obviously, we are a big country, and there can sometimes be difficulties in providing these services to rural and remote areas, but for the most part our pathology providers do that, and they do it in a very efficient way. We are very lucky to have them. This bill is important. The government is looking at the healthcare system across the whole spectrum of healthcare provision, and this is a sign that a government really understands and cares about the health of our people. I recommend this bill to the House. If I can say just a little bit more in the few minutes that are left to me, we heard some of the complaints about the health system from the opposition. This is my 50th year working in the public hospital system, and it seems to me like a very short period, but I've seen dramatic changes in the healthcare system over that period. I was a medical student when Gough Whitlam first introduced Medibank to Australia, and it was a revolution. It enabled people of limited means to access good-quality health care, sometimes for the first time. I'm very, very proud of that achievement. That achievement was destroyed by Malcolm Fraser in his government, and reintroduced as Medicare by the Hawke government, and we have relied on Medicare since that time. The opposition tried again to destroy it in the Howard government, and then Peter Dutton, one of the worst health ministers that Australia has ever had, tried to introduce Medicare copayments and to break down the fundamental basis of Medicare equitable care for all. That was a great shame. Luckily, it didn't last long. The Abbott government, who also didn't value health care also didn't last long. For the opposition to say they've always protected Medicare is simply untrue, and the track record shows that. The freezing of the Medicare rebates for almost 10 years by the previous coalition government was a tragedy, and it has led us to a position where we have to play catchup. We can't fix the health system and every problem overnight, but I'm very proud to be part of a government with the Minister for Health and Ageing, Mark Butler, who understands the importance of national access to health care for everyone in an equitable manner. I'm proud to be part of a government that understands that, and we are repairing the damage that was done by almost 10 years of a coalition government. We're not going to fix it overnight, but we are dealing with it on an incremental basis, and there are many issues to deal with. It's not just about access to GPs—we need to train more of our own doctors, for example. That's expensive, but we need to do it. We are still importing 50 per cent our GP workforce. That's too many. We need to be training more Australian-born people or Australian citizens as doctors. That's really important. We need to look at ways that we can encourage more of our medical trainees to move into rural, regional and even outer metropolitan areas. I think the present modelling, the modified Monash modelling, needs to be tweaked, certainly. And it's true in my electorate of Macarthur; we need to have better access to GPs in my electorate out of south-western Sydney. We need to look at ways that we can use other members of the health workforce—our clinical nurses, our pharmacists, our allied health professionals—to provide access to primary care for people. I'll say a little bit about our pharmacists. My belief is that the single biggest advance in health care in the last parliament was the 60-day prescribing, which effectively halved the costs for people paying for their medication. It was a huge advance and long, long overdue. But we had to fight the coalition tooth and nail to get that legislation through, and there was a huge marketing campaign by the pharmacists against 60-day prescribing. Absolute no-brainer—virtually every other country in the world had 60- or even 90-day prescribing. This made the system much more efficient. People didn't have to go to the pharmacist every month; they could go every couple of months. It also meant that the costs of the prescriptions were mostly halved for many of our constituents—a great advance. There is much more to be done, and the reduction in prescription costs to a maximum of $25, which the legislation introduced today, is a huge advance. The Labor government understands the importance of health care across the whole economy and across the whole spectrum of Australia. No matter who you are, you get equitable access to health care in Australia because of the work of Labor governments. There have been some reasonable coalition health ministers—Peter Baume was one—and I must say that I think the work that Greg Hunt did in the pandemic was good. But, overall, Australia can thank Labor governments for the maintenance of a universal healthcare insurance system and equitable access to care, and I'm very proud to be part of a government that does support that. This legislation is a small part of that, but it's a sign of a government that understands the health system. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced. Ordered that this bill be reported to the House without amendment. Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025, Aged Care (Accommodation Payment Security) Levy Amendment Bill 2025 132

Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025

Aged Care (Accommodation Payment Security) Levy Amendment Bill 2025

Second Reading 132 12:09 Mr JOYCE e5d New England It's a crucial part of our life. We have the joy of birth. We look for obstetrics and maternity wards. We look for all the things. It's part and parcel of where the human condition comes into the world, and we want the security of that. When you go to a new town in so many regional areas, the first thing that the wife, the lady, wants to know is: 'Okay, if I'm going to have a baby, where am I going?' And if you can't provide that, it becomes a real downer. It becomes a mechanism by which people say, 'I'm a bit scared about going to this town.' Then, of course, there are the schools. People want the capacity to say: 'Where are my children going to go to school? What is the school like? Does it have the capacity to look after my child in such a way that gives them the best opportunity to go on with their life, whichever way that may be?' That becomes a big consideration. Also, they ask if they're going to get a job and what sort of job they are going to have. Where are they going to work? What sort of job will their wife or husband or partner have? Those questions are so important when considering a town—and so too are hospitals, of course, for if you get sick, and then, later on, aged care. Aged care is very, very important. Every person goes through that time in their life, if they're lucky, when they have to consider the welfare of their parents or of people that they've grown to love and consider how they will look after them when they are vulnerable and unable to look after themselves. This is where aged care is so vitally important. Going into aged care is very similar to going to boarding school. You're going to an area that is different; it is not your home. The very disconcerting thing is that it's a boarding school you're never going to leave. This is a time of fear in people's lives, and we have a role to make sure that we placate that fear and that we provide these people with the greatest dignity we can possibly afford them. This is why this accommodation payment security levy is part and parcel with providing that security. In my area, I spend a lot of time, as all House of Representative members no doubt do, like yourself, Madam Deputy Speaker Lawrence, going to aged-care facilities. You bring joy to a facility by being there, sitting there for smoko, talking to people—you find out that one of them has a birthday and you cut the birthday cake with them, and they've got their makeup on, so you sit and have a photo with them. Once you give one a kiss on the cheek, you've got to give them all a kiss on the cheek, otherwise they get angry with you! It's great. You get a real sense of joy being there, because of the aged-care facility and what it gives back to that person. Years ago, when I was a senator for Queensland, I was out at Boulia, which is—you go west from Longreach and go to Winton and then you go to Boulia and up north to Mount Isa or south down to Birdsville. I used to do a bit of work at Boulia. Now, we're spending money on a road to get from Boulia down to Laverton and to Western Australia. I hope the Labor Party continues with that incredibly important road. When I spoke to people in Boulia, their big town was Longreach; the big smoke was Longreach. I'd say, 'What do you want?' They'd say: 'I want the capacity to retire and die in Boulia, because that's where I'm from. I'm not from Longreach. I'm not from Winton. I'm certainly not from Mount Isa. I want to live my life out in Boulia.' This is why, as part of this debate, we've got to make sure that aged care fits the requirements of all regional areas. I want to mention three in my electorate—Denman, Corindi and Emmaville. I went to Emmaville aged care facility. It's community run. That's when there was a birthday, and I had to preside over the birthday, and it was really nice. They grabbed me and sat me down and said: 'We are going to go broke unless people clearly understand we're a community based facility. We are a not-for-profit. There is nobody who owns us.' People in these regional towns, with the requirements that governments have put on them, say, 'I'm not going to make myself vulnerable or liable for the requirements of an aged-care facility for which I'm merely doing this as charity. I'm on the board as charity.' We've got to be careful. The requirements for a 24-hour registered nurse and all these things—we've got to understand that in Emmaville or Denman or Corindi, if their aged-care facilities close down, those people have nowhere to go. There is no alternative. They can't all go down to Tamworth and go into palliative care; there's just nowhere to go. It'll be dynamite. You literally, almost, have to put them back out on the street. We've got to be very mindful in how we do this and understand that it's not all the aged-care facilities of Lane Cove or Maribyrnong; it's aged-care facilities in little regional towns. There's got to be that nuance in this where you let these people come in, and you understand that, when they walk in the door, you're talking to people who are doing this for charity. It was the same in Corindi— A division having been called in the House of Representatives — Sitting suspended from 12:15 to 12:31 Mr JOYCE e5d As I was saying, it's issues about how aged care and aged-care policy understand the requirements of community based facilities in small regional areas for which, if those community based facilities are removed, there is no facility; there is no alternative. If I take Emmaville for instance, we are seeing people come in from an unfortunately long way away from Emmaville to an obscure little town called Emmaville because there's no alternative closer to where they're from. We also see the same thing at Denman. At Denman, there are people from Merriwa, from Singleton and from all around that come to the Denman community aged-care facility because they have no aged-care facility in their town. We've really got to make sure that there is a nuance in the policy structure that understands this. I'll give you a classic example of where a nuance is causing massive problems, and I'll go back to the Denman facility. In the Denman facility, we have fought for and received a $9.2 million grant. I thank the government for a $9.2 million grant—exceptional! We have people lined up to get into this community aged-care facility which also has palliative care, end-of-life care, in the Hunter Valley, where people have lived all their lives—an area which provides all the coal and the resources that have propped up our nation. They're good people who work there. Before I was a member, it used to be in Dan's seat, and then I took over. I went to the league and the nurses there said: 'We've got to catch up with you. We've got some issues with what's happening in the aged-care facility.' So I caught up with them, and they drove me up there, and I went and had a yarn with them. Just listen to this: they have a 10-acre paddock for expansion on. Your old style western suburbs block was a quarter of an acre. This is a 10-acre paddock. It's not big. There are a couple of trees on it and a little bit of a gully with an old stock fence surrounding it. There is nothing spectacular about this at all. It's in the middle of the Hunter Valley, so we're not in the Amazon jungle or in Alpine areas. It's just a paddock with a couple of trees on it that is proximate to where their aged-care facility is, which is where they have to expand to because they're blocked in where they are. They have to pay a carbon offset to build on that paddock. Listen to this carefully: to build units for aged-care people and for people in palliative care so they can move out of their houses and into aged care and therefore free up the houses for other people to live in—that's another part of the equation—it is going to cost that aged-care facility $3.51 million to pay the carbon offsets to some greaser out there for the paddock they own. That's $3.51 million for carbon offsets that has to be paid by an aged-care facility to some carbon trader. Now, let's just turn that on its head, on the virtue side of it. Where would that money better be spent? I'm going to make this crazy assertion that maybe, if they didn't have to pay it to some greaser who is probably a multimillionaire and who's basically buying and selling nothing that's called 'carbon offsets', they could build more aged-care units, they could look after more people, they could create the mechanism for more people to be treated with dignity in their lives, they would be able to shorten the waiting time to get into the Denman aged-care facility and, by so allowing people to go to the Denman aged-care facility, we would have more free houses for people who do not have a house to move into, because the grandparents will have moved out of their houses. This is insane. I've put it on Facebook, I've put it around and I'm talking about here in the chamber. This is something that the government should get on to. It's something where the minister should say, 'What on earth's happening there? Billy, go find out if that bloke's talking a load of garbage. Just find out if that's the truth. Chase that up for me and then come back.' 'Minister, we've made a call to the Denman aged-care facility. Unfortunately, it's the truth.' 'Okay. I'm going to fix this; I'm going to fix this today. I'm going to do something splendid for the people of the Hunter Valley and for Australia in general. I'm going to ring up the other minister and say, "Can we scrub this craziness? Have you got a ministerial discretion? Good! Use your discretion right now, ring them up and say 'Congratulations! We've just landed you another $3.51 million that you can now spend on units,' which is what we want in aged care. And say to the greaser who thought they were in line for $3.51 million off a community aged-care facility and community members, 'Unfortunately, it was a bad day in the office for you, because you're not getting your money.'"' That's the sort of thing we—not we but the government—can do. There you go; I've told you again. People sit back and go, 'Who could dream this rubbish up?' I didn't believe it. I thought, 'You're having a go at me.' I've done it on a Facebook post. She actually said, 'Okay, Cyclone, here's the documentation,' and there it was. They were talking about $3.5 million or $3.51 million and said, 'We might be able to get this down a bit.' For what? We need to be more dynamic in dealing with aged care across all sectors and able to say, 'Okay, we need a policy for community based aged care in small regional towns. We need to understand. We need to have a proper audit. What do we actually need to do, not to put more costs on you but to help you so that you can stay open and grow, because there are more and more people?' The baby boomers, as we know, are going into aged care, and we've got to try and become more dynamic so that these people have got somewhere to go. My daughter is a doctor. In Tamworth they do not have the room in palliative care for anybody. There is no room, so the idea that you would close down an aged-care facility is dynamite, because there literally is nowhere for these people to go. So we've got to keep these facilities open. To go back to their homes means the families have to look after them. If we botch this—and it's 'we'; it's everybody in Canberra—then probably the only place they can go is back into their homes. I am very, very lucky. I've got a big old Catholic family out in the bush. We've got a big heap of us. We looked after both my mum and my dad until they died. Dad died at 98½. Mum had a serious stroke, and we still looked after mum after her stroke until she died. My brother's a doctor. Pat looked after her down at Wollongong. So we're very blessed. Why do I bring this up? It's very expensive to look after your parents in your home. It's probably a minimum of $2½ thousand a week. That's about what it costs. If we don't have aged-care facilities, there are very few families that have $2½ thousand a week per parent. You've got to have nurses 24 hours a day, or you've got to have family members who are nurses and who are doctors to look after them. In closing, can we please have a close look at and nuance the regional facilities—especially the community based ones—and can you, Minister, please ring up the Denman community aged-care facility and say, 'We want to talk to you about how we scrub this $3.51 million that you've got to pay for a carbon offset.' 12:39 Ms SHARKIE 265980 Mayo In representing Mayo, the oldest electorate by median age in South Australia and among the top 10 oldest in the nation, I have the privilege of assisting my constituents with their aged-care issues and other issues they and their loved ones experience. I wish to lend my voice to support my older constituents as we consider the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025. This bill will provide for technical and consequential amendments to give effect to the Aged Care Act 2024. It aims to ensure the act's smooth implementation through transitional changes from the old to new act, including ensuring correct payment of aged-care subsidies; provision for interim services to be provided in high-demand periods; allowing access to unspent funds; clarifying information-sharing between the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing and Services Australia, which will be very important; provision of substantial penalties for misuse of personal information; and requiring five-yearly reviews of the Aged Care Quality Standards. The bill refers to aged-care rules, the final version of which are not due to be tabled until October. I hear of a 1 November start date. This seems to be cutting things very fine for providers, who will need to prepare for implementation, and for recipients of aged-care, who need to know what to expect. I understand the bill includes a time limited rule, making power to enable the government to move more quickly to address emerging issues following the implementation. This is highly unusual and concerning, and I do not think this place should write a blank cheque by providing the minister with the power to make rules which could alter and override rights, entitlements and obligations set out in the act. That is the express intent of the parliament, without parliamentary consideration. That's the purpose of us being here. This bill also includes automatic processes to support decisions on the classification level of aged care to which a person is entitled, the prioritisation and allocation of aged-care places and means-testing to calculate how much a person should co-contribute financially to their care. Automation warrants real concern and caution, in my view. That's particularly so given the sobering example of robodebt and the unfriendliness of online systems for older members of our community and those for whom English is a second or third language. I therefore urge the government to guarantee improved availability of services to assist older people with that transition. Over the last 12 months, my constituents have reported sporadic difficulty and lengthy waiting times on the Services Australia aged-care line and My Aged Care. People will need quick, easy access to these supports and to aged-care service offices to address any questions or problems that may arise out of the implementation of the new act. I note the bill avoids substantive changes to the Aged Care Act passed late last year. Unfortunately, this means some worrying policies, such as charging increasing co-payments for personal care, will not be revisited. I remain concerned that increasing co-payments or personal care may be detrimental to older people, who may feel they cannot afford the care they need. While help with a daily shower is not clinical care, a person's health can decline quickly, necessitating clinical care if they, for example, suffer an infection or a fall in the shower due to receiving inadequate personal care. I've asked advocates from the Council on the Ageing, COTA, National Seniors Australia, the Older Persons Advocacy Network, known as OPAN, and provider peak, Ageing Australia, for their comments on this bill, and I thank them for their ongoing feedback on all things aged care. I regret, as do these well-respected bodies, the delay in commencement of the new rights and protections for older people under the act but understand the need to defer the commencement from 1 July this year to 1 November this year to enable providers and older people alike to properly prepare for change. I was pleased when the government heeded our calls by making a pre-election commitment to fund an additional 83,000 home-care places from 1 July to address the huge number of people waiting a year or more for their approved home-care packages to be allocated. The government's decision to defer delivery of these additional packages until after the new act starts on 1 November, rather than 1 July as promised, is a great disappointment. This will do one of two things. People will either end up injuring themselves and going into hospital or, perhaps prematurely, into an aged-care home—that is, of course, if they can get a bad; or, indeed, they will die at home, perhaps prematurely. The peak bodies are also very concerned. National Seniors has pointed out that, every time we refer to a backlog of the 87,597 packages, we are actually talking about nearly 90,000 people. These are people, not packages, who are not getting the care that they need and so rightly deserve. During that year of waiting for care for their approved level of care, their health will likely deteriorate. They may have to be hospitalised or, as I said, relocate to residential care. And, as I said, some will pass away. Last year, I asked the former minister for aged care how many people had passed away or entered residential aged care during the 2023-2024 year while waiting for their approved level of home care. I was informed that 3,383 people died and 7,380 entered residential aged care while waiting for their home-care package that had been approved but was still not with them. These people had expressed the desire to receive help at home, preferred by them and cheaper for the taxpayer, and applied for this, but, in the end, they didn't receive it and their wishes were thwarted. The government's choice to continue this state of affairs when they have the power and the budget to address the delay in delivering home care is unkind to our most vulnerable citizens. I would say it is unjust. Advocates share these concerns, and they have also called for the release of the additional packages per the government's pre-election commitment. Sadly, this has not been heeded. Delays are exacerbated by lengthening the wait times for aged-care assessments at the start of the process before someone is approved to go in the national priority system waiting list for home care. The government previously advised that the introduction of the single assessment system for aged care would help streamline assessment processes and clear backlogs. My constituents and peak bodies tell me that this is having the opposite effect. While it may slow the growth of the actual waiting list—those numbers waiting for packages, those people waiting for packages—it inadequately reflects the buildup of unmet demand, which continues to rise. My constituents Valerie and Peter have been trying since April to secure a reassessment for Peter as his needs have changed markedly since his initial aged-care assessment in 2021. Despite growing urgency, their family's concerted efforts to contact My Aged Care and the assessment provider every week or two and support from my office, they've only just secured a telephone reassessment for Peter this week, three months later. It's unreasonable for families to have to advocate to this extent simply to secure an assessment date. We're not talking about the actual package; we are talking about someone conducting the assessment on a person, particularly when their needs change. Peter's family say there were advised by My Aged Care to book respite care for Peter in October without having an assessment conducted and approval in place. This was not tenable since they were told it would be costing $600 per day, compared with $40 to $60 per day if he had an assessment and approval for respite. Advocates advise that they are hearing from many older people seeking assistance with long assessment wait times. Some aged-care assessment providers are resorting to telehealth to address the delays. While this may seem quicker, telehealth aged-care assessments are unlikely to deliver the best outcomes for older people, particularly those with more complex needs. Some carers report being asked by the assessor to comment on the abilities of the person being assessed without having the training to accurately describe this, all in the presence of the person that's being assessed. So, after waiting three to six months for an assessment, and then up to a year—and now it's over a year—for the home-care package, when they finally receive care, older people will be paying more for it under this new system. Increases in the hourly rates for personal care and domestic assistance of up to 100 per cent have been flagged by some providers in Mayo. These increases are proposed to commence from 1 November. Some increases are above the indicative price guides that have been issued for Support at Home services. This will dramatically erode the care that people will receive from their package money, even for those guaranteed to be no worse off in terms of personal co-contributions. Charging twice as much per hour will only reduce the amount of care and services received. My constituent Beryl was provided with spreadsheets from her home-care provider. They showed that, if she were to maintain her current hours of personal care and domestic assistance following the introduction of Support at Home in November, she would have a funding shortfall of nearly $1,500 per month. Further, Beryl's funding would no longer cover the services she has received for years, including continence aids, Webster medication packaging, occasional meals, emergency alert monitoring and more. Despite receiving aged care since 2020, and thus being no worse off in terms of co-payments, this price hike would create a stark deficit in Beryl's care from 1 November. It is clear that she would be worse off in so many measures. Fortunately, Beryl has since been approved for a high-level home-care package. Rather than increasing her care as hoped, a significant proportion of this additional funding will be absorbed by increased hourly rates for core supports and trying to maintain some of her other pre-existing services. Government assurances sent to Beryl in May that there were measures in place to ensure reasonable home-care fees appear empty, given the price hikes that she is going to experience. I'm concerned about the cost of this new system for our older generations who have built this country, raised younger generations and paid their taxes to support others in times of need. I also recognise the many benefits of the reforms, including an independent complaints process, safeguards for decision-making, protections for whistleblowers, enhanced quality safeguards and a rights based aged care system. However, we are not doing right by older Australians in terms of the current waitlist for home-care packages and the enormous unknown volume of people just waiting to be seen. In conclusion, while I support this bill, and despite a royal commission, there are still many failings in how we deliver aged care in our nation. Overall, we need to do much, much better by our older Australians. 12:52 Dr HAINES 282335 Indi I rise to speak to the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill. I note the contribution from the member for Mayo, and I'd like to note her extraordinary commitment and knowledge of aged care and her advocacy in this space. We all learn a lot when we listen to the member for Mayo. The response to the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety required a rebuild of our aged-care system. It was ambitious for the government to implement the long-awaited aged-care reforms to commence from 1 July. For the dignity and safety of the older people that our aged-care system supports, for their families and for workers across the sector, I understand that reforms of this magnitude must be implemented in a considered and effective way. But that ambitious start of 1 July became unrealistic, and the commencement of the new act has been delayed until 1 November. These delays are not without consequence, and we're seeing an impact of the delay in the delivery of services that help keep older Australians at home for longer. This bill legislates a myriad of technical amendments to give effect to the aged-care reforms. Many of these are minor in nature but still important to ensure that provisions like the 'no worse off' principle can be applied for people who are already in aged care. I support these changes for the smooth implementation of the new aged-care system, but there are two changes in particular that I wish to highlight today. First, this bill includes a new rulemaking power that allows the minister to make rules modifying the operation of the Aged Care Act we passed last year without passing legislation. This is a broad power of delegation. According to the Scrutiny of Bills Committee, provisions such as these may limit parliamentary oversight and subvert the appropriate relationship between the parliament and the executive. They're the types of provisions the Scrutiny of Bills Committee is particularly concerned with. While I would usually prefer powers such as these to remain within the parliament, in this case I support the inclusion of these delegated legislation powers because I support the intent behind them—that is, to ensure that continuity of care is maintained for older persons in the event of unforeseen or unintended consequences arising during the transition to the new act. I'm also comforted by the safeguards in the delegated legislation powers. The Scrutiny of Bills Committee will continue to provide oversight, the powers will only operate for the first two years of the act and any rules made by the minister which change the act will be disallowable by the parliament, allowing for some scrutiny. I urge the government to ensure that any changes the minister makes to the act under this power be communicated to the parliament and to the community more broadly. It's crucial that, as we move into this new system, consultation with organisations like the Council on the Ageing and the Older Persons Advocacy Network does not stop. This is a once-in-a-generation change. We must get it right, and to do so involves constant reflection and taking on board feedback from the people most affected. Second, this bill clarifies that, under Support at Home, gardening and cleaning services will no longer be capped at specific times. This is a measure I welcome. When I spoke on the Aged Care Bill 2024, I noted the concerns from my electorate of Indi about whether package funding would be enough to meet the real costs of these domestic services. I'll be watching closely how it works in reality as home support transitions into the new home-care packages. Travel costs remain a major challenge in regional and rural Australia. Impacting service availability puts pressure on an already stretched workforce, and these costs are often higher than they are in our cities. Packages must account for this and not disadvantage regional Australians. I support this bill, but I take this opportunity to highlight serious deficiencies in the current home-care system, which my constituents are so very much relying on, before the new Aged Care Act and support-at-home system commences. Home-care packages make a life-changing difference for people across in my electorate in north-east Victoria. For older Australians, getting help with basics like cleaning and gardening preserves their ability to stay in their home for longer. For their families, it provides the peace of mind that their loved ones are getting the care and support they need when they need it. But, while the benefits of these packages are clear, the reality of getting an assessment leaves too many older people languishing on waitlists; we've just heard graphic descriptions of this from the member for Mayo. Workforce shortages across the aged-care sector mean older people in more remote parts of my electorate of Indi can struggle to receive services, or they receive a lower level of service with funding swallowed up by travel costs instead of care. In delaying the full rollout of aged-care reforms—a move the sector acknowledges was necessary but frustrating—the government has also delayed the rollout of its promised 83,000 new home-care packages. This has caused real and growing concern. For those older Australians simply trying to live independently, this delay risks making an already difficult situation even worse. For their families, it means that they have to juggle providing what care they can and navigating the system—and that this is drawn out for even longer. The crossbench, alongside aged-care advocates, made a clear, compassionate and practical plea to the government to fund 20,000 new home-care packages under the current scheme and then transition those packages into the new Support at Home program when it begins. Yet, while more than 87,000 Australians remain stuck on a waitlist, the government has provided no explanation—none—as to why it won't act on this. This gives no comfort to my constituents and it gives no comfort to me as these people, these hardworking older Australians, are trying to secure assessment or services. As National Seniors Australia said, when we are talking about packages we are talking about people—people who physically cannot shower themselves, mop their floors, mow their lawns, clean their gutters or prepare their meals. These matters are some of the most common and also some of the most heartbreaking stories that my office deals with week in, week out. I promised the people of Indi that I would hold the government accountable on services such as these, and I'll keep up that fight; this is way too important not to do that. I welcome the establishment of a Senate inquiry into Home Care Packages, initiated by Senator Pocock. This inquiry will examine the impact of delaying the Support at Home program and the withholding of the new home-care packages in the transition. The crossbench continues to ensure that there is oversight and accountability of the government. This is always important, but it is especially so for services that are critical to preserving the dignity and quality of life of our older Australians. With four months until the lights go green on the new aged-care system, our aged-care system must, as the final report of the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety emphasised: … assist older people to live an active, self-determined and meaningful life in a safe and caring environment that allows for dignified living in old age. To the government more broadly: please, make sure that this is our focus. 13:00 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina In regard to the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025, it is important to put on record some of the concerns the coalition has in relation to aged care. I just listened to the member for Indi very closely. She is concerned about some changes whereby the minister would have all of the say over changes that would previously have been legislative. You'd expect a crossbencher to say that. I think we do need to allow ministers to be ministers. They have oversight of departments and of secretaries of departments, and I would actually like to see, in one sense, ministers not just be a tick and flick for departments and for secretaries. I think that is occurring way too much. In this government I think we have a lot of ministers who are very cautious and careful about the NACC and about the ability for a person to make anonymous a complaint about a minister who doesn't abide by the wishes of their secretary or their department. Therefore, they are nervous about making a decision and very nervous about a referral to the National Anti-Corruption Commission. I think we elect ministers to be ministers. Secretaries will never have their names on a ballot paper, nor will faceless officials or bureaucrats. Ministers are there to be ministers, and I think this is going to be so important. Now, when it comes to aged care, I represent a lot of aged-care centres and, whether they're in Cootamundra, Cowra, Harden-Murrumburrah, Junee, Temora, Young or even a large centre such Wagga Wagga, they are really struggling at the moment. I know the interim report of the royal commission into aged care had 'Neglect' in its title, and some of the examples that were exposed and came to light because of that investigation were horrendous—there's absolutely no question about that. But the government then, in a kneejerk response, adopted that recommendation to just have registered nurses 24/7 for each and every aged-care centre. This has placed so much pressure on aged-care centres in rural and remote Australia, and they are closing at far too rapid a rate. We need them to be opening, not closing. Let's just take a little facility such as one that I know of within an easy drive of Wagga Wagga. It had around 20 clients, most of whom did not require the sort of care that would need a nurse on hand 24/7, but all of a sudden they have to provide that around-the-clock supervision by an RN. Now, for an aged-care provider such as this, it's not just one person. When we take into account annual leave, stress leave, maternity leave, domestic violence leave—all the sorts of leave for an RN that is part and parcel of any workplace these days—you need about five people to cover that one position 24/7. Obviously, people can only work a certain number of hours each day—preferably around eight—therefore, you're going to need three people a day to cover that 24-hour around-the-clock supervision. You can't just have those three people working all year around. You need about five or six people. When you've got those little centres looking after 20 people who are pretty healthy, it does provide a huge impost on their finances. They can only afford to charge as much as they can. What we then end up seeing is a lot of the little aged-care providers closing down—and they're often in little towns—and then people cannot age in place. So what happens is that a person who has lived in a little town all of their lives all of a sudden gets packed up and shipped off to a large rural hub in a regional city, and then they don't get the visitors. They don't have their family close by. People cannot visit them. All too often, we see this happening across regional Australia. It's an unintended consequence, I appreciate, of what I guess was a well-intended recommendation of the royal commission, but it is placing such a burden on aged-care providers in regional Australia, which were already struggling to make ends meet. In the main, they were doing a wonderful job. They really were. Yes, you're always going to get examples of bad eggs doing the wrong thing and putting the making of money first and the provision of health care for our vulnerable aged people second. But, in the main, particularly in regional Australia, our providers are doing a great job. I visited a centre at an aged-care provider at Boorowa recently, and they're doing a fantastic job. I pay great credit to them. I know that Mayor Rick Firman OAM, who is actually in parliament today, is still keen to see the $3.7 million that was allocated by the coalition government to Whiddon homes in Temora see the light of day. They made changes to the infrastructure that they were going to provide. It was COVID. There were a whole lot of other factors that came into play, but now they're still waiting and wondering where their money is, and they're not seeing any gratification from the Labor government, which says it's going to be a government for all and leave no-one behind. Well, unfortunately, Temora is being left behind in this regard. I would urge and implore the aged-care minister to pay attention to that request by Whiddon homes in Temora. Temora, like many of our regional cities, towns, villages, hamlets and districts, has an ageing population, and particularly so. We want to see people be able to age in place. The Coolamon aged-care centre recently reopened a wing of around 10 to a dozen beds, which had been closed because they couldn't find staff, and that's another big problem. I appreciate, Deputy Speaker Payne, that you're from Canberra. It wouldn't be the issue for the aged-care centres in your electorate that it is in the Riverina. My electorate now shares a common boundary with yours, but that line on that map—there's a big difference between the haves and have-nots, let me tell you. It's more than just a line on a map. At Coolamon, they couldn't find staff. They had to go and get special provisions to get staff in from overseas so that they could reopen that wing. Let me tell you, the beds were filled very, very quickly. Coolamon is not that far from Wagga Wagga, but, even in Wagga Wagga, the aged-care beds are all taken up very, very quickly. With the passage of the Albanese government's Aged Care Act 2024 in the last parliament, the coalition upheld its commitment to a rights based act for older Australians to guarantee a world-class aged-care system into the future. We are absolutely going to be needing a world-class aged-care system into the future because we're all getting older, and the older we get, the more that aged-care centre looms. We should all be very nice to our children, because I think it's ultimately them who are going to make the decisions about where we go and when we go! Through our coalition's persistent negotiations on the act, we were able to achieve significant improvements to the government's reforms—albeit proposed at the time—to protect the interests of older Australians and future generations. I know a lot of our aged-care centres in rural Australia often community-led, community-run and community-supported organisations. They are locals who form committees and trusts, and run these places not for profit, and, by gee, they do a remarkable job. One of the most critical outcomes of our efforts was the introduction of grandfathering arrangements. These arrangements guarantee that Australians who are already in residential aged care on a home-care package, or are assessed as waiting for their allocated home-care package, will not see any changes to their existing arrangements. That is important. I know the member for Indi talked about the number of Australia who are still waiting for their home-care packages to come through, and this delay is not helping matters. One of the situations with the staffing arrangements in rural Australia is not helped by the number of people who are now going to work on the National Disability Insurance Scheme and getting out of aged care. I appreciate the government—and I do appreciate it, I mean that in every sense of the word—has increased the pay for aged-care workers and I commend the government for that. They are doing a wonderful job for, in some cases, Australia's most vulnerable. But it still doesn't equate to some of the money being earned in the NDIS space, and we have lost a lot of good workers, people who had qualifications, people who went to TAFE and elsewhere to gain those qualifications and are now leaving the aged-care sector and going to work in the NDIS space because they can earn a lot more money. Their skills have been lost by aged care, and that is a great shame. It's no surprise that in the first week of the 48th Parliament the government has introduced this bill to amend 325 items of Labor's own legislation, passed just months ago. That's why we seek to have this bill set to committee—to ensure appropriate scrutiny is placed upon the proposed amendments. I say that, even though I do believe ministers have a responsibility to not just tick-and-flick the in-tray proliferation which secretaries and departments sometimes put in front of them. I know—I've been a minister. I know how this is the case. We remain increasingly concerned and disappointed by the lack of transparency this government has shown during the process of reform. Those 325 changes to Labor's own legislation is not an insignificant number. And 197 repeals to Labor's own legislation is also not an insignificant number. Many of these are a result of Labor's lack of consultation with older Australians and the broader aged-care sector. When ministers and even bureaucrats are making these sorts of reforms, they really should reach out, particularly to those NFPs I mentioned earlier to see these community-led and community-run organisations and what they're doing, and ask: 'How is this going to affect what you do? How is this going to affect your bottom line?' They are not making riches, trust me. What they are doing is putting in place measures to keep the lights on, keep the doors open and keep the beds for people who are seeking to go into aged care and who have lived in those local communities all of their lives. It is simply not right that they are left high and dry because of decisions made in this city which affect their lives. They then have to be packed up and shipped away to far-off aged-care centres in communities they are not familiar with, with people they do not know. Whilst I appreciate that they were still provided, hopefully, quality care, it's just got to be more than that. We have to be more empathetic and more sympathetic to the needs of our aged-care residents and also our aged-care providers in regional, rural and especially remote Australia. We won't seek to delay the passage of this bill, Australians deserve better than broken promises and more procrastination and delay by this Albanese Labor government—I understand that—but these changes have to be scrutinised to ensure the process of reform can be implemented in the best way possible, because, at the end of the day, our society is ageing, and we need to provide the very best quality of care. But, for want of a better word, there that also needs to be the quantity of care, and, in regional Australia at the moment, it's tough. It's tough for these providers to make ends meet. They do a grand job. I take my hat off to them, and people, like those who are running the centre at Gundagai, are doing it really tough. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced. Ordered that this bill be reported to the House without amendment. Aged Care (Accommodation Payment Security) Levy Amendment Bill 2025 139

Aged Care (Accommodation Payment Security) Levy Amendment Bill 2025

Second Reading 139 Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2025 139

Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2025

Second Reading 139 15:59 Mr JOYCE e5d New England It's interesting that we have in this Chamber today two people who have both been the Deputy Chair of the National Security Committee. What is not astounding is why we find this issue so important. Australia has found itself in circumstances unlike, I would suggest, anything since the Second World War or maybe similar to the Cold War. We have to understand exactly how there is a malevolent force that does not believe in the democratic principle and does not believe in the general rules of law of the international community. We have to understand that this process is not a secret; there have been 14 points delivered to Australia about how it must act, so this is not anything of any peculiarity. One only needs to read about the circumstances of history and how the world works. I might reflect deeply because this is something of the utmost importance to me, noting that this bill, the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2025, is about compulsory questioning within the framework of ASIO. There was a time around 260 BC when there was a formidable power called Carthage, which basically dominated the Western Mediterranean. The Carthaginians—which were really the Venetians, which, in today's parlance, were the Lebanese—occupied a whole section of Corsica. Within that remit of their power, they included the island of Sicily. Sicily was part of the dominion, as were sections of the Iberian Peninsula. What was happening at the same time was a rise of another power, on the Italian Peninsula; that was Rome—not Latinian but Rome. Rome were a bit unhappy about the Carthaginians being in Sicily, so they decided to push the matter; it took them a range of times to do it but they finally did it. On that circumstance—I don't want to dwell on it too much, except to say history repeats itself. After that we had the dominion of the Western Mediterranean speaking Latin and the whole culture change to Roman. That's how society works; there's challenge in response, as the texts I studied at high school said. And we've got it again: China wants the Western Pacific, rather than the Western Mediterranean, to be part of, in its words, a Mandarin speaking culture. It says that democracy is not essential, that democracy is a secondary form of government to guided government. That is, to be quite frank, totalitarianism—the unitary power of a person that subordinates the right of the individual. We have seen that in splendid form in recent times, with the unilateral takeover of the South China Sea. I think you would see it in the more exceptional form of how China deals with the individuals or citizens of Hong Kong, with the incremental increase of Chinese power and Chinese ethos. Journalists have been just taken off the streets. Some of them are so brave that they went back and revisited their belief in that ubiquitous nature of what we are as humans—their desire for freedom, their desire to speak their mind and their belief in their responsibility to let other people know. All the facets and judgements that make up an open society—they were not allowed to have that. We had tennis players—major ones, and one lady especially, who happened to make a statement against the government, never to be seen again except once when they paraded her out for the media. This is the world we are living in now—and they've been in this building. We know about the inference and the capacity not of the Chinese people but of the communist regime to have their agents, their quasi-agents or their sympathisers working in this building. This is not pretend; this is happening. We're in live time. At the change of government, which I could see happening—we're not fools; we could see it happening—I said to senior Labor people in the corridor: 'If there's one thing you must be aware of, don't think the communist influence is coming; the communist influence is here. The communist actors are here. They are here right now.' What's so important about this is that, with this incremental attack on our democratic way of life, with this incremental attack on the sovereignty of our nation, with, unfortunately, the circumstances, prevarications and uncertainty in US policy that we've seen lately, we have to be so incredibly astute, aware and on our toes. We have to be en pointe. We have to understand that, if we don't make ourselves aware, understand the role of ASIO and understand the role of ASIS, we are putting our nation at risk. I was concerned when the National Security Committee of Cabinet talked about removing ASIO. That is not the thing you want to do. You need to have, in that fridge-like chamber that, if you're lucky enough, one day you'll get to sit in, all the information before you for the decisions that you have to make, which at times have people's lives on the line. We need to invest in these agencies so that they are at the very top of their game. This is going to become even harder now. One of the things that stands behind the difficulty that's now arising is what is happening with artificial intelligence. With artificial intelligence, as we move toward quantum computing, the capacity of a malevolent force to have effect, see everything you do, hear everything you say, observe every document you write and know of every interrelationship you have with every colleague—let's talk about a fundamental thing. Once I get access to your phone—and I do—I also have access to every person you talk to. I know every person you talk to. With AI, it's not like humans going around listening to people; it's AI listening to people, listening to the people who you talk to and listening to the people that they talk to. They can very easily cover this wide dynamic and absorb this information. It doesn't take them long before they know exactly what the Labor caucus is saying. It doesn't take them long before they know exactly what the coalition is saying. It doesn't take them long before they know exactly of all the interrelationships you have, and you can bet one of those paths leads to Babylon, leads to the capacity for a person to say, 'Got it; I'm inside and hearing everything.' And how do we suss these people out? We have had people in cabinet who we later find are very closely aligned with companies that are state owned enterprises of the Chinese government. We were not at the time aware of them. That's a disgrace. That's a total disgrace—treacherous. And I'm not for one moment saying that they were on the Labor side; no, they were on ours. They are around. So those of us in this room also have a responsibility as members of parliament to keep your eyes and ears open and to listen to people. I hate to say this, but don't take them on face value; listen to them and be aware. There is a lot of money to be made if you are treacherous. You can set yourself up very well if you are treacherous, and that's when you need an organisation such as ASIO to come in and say, 'We want to ask some serious questions. You're going to sit down.' I always believed, when I used to think about this, that it would be great if you had senior, highly respected members from both sides of the political fence who were retired and out of parliament and basically had a role to have general observation of members of parliament. They would have the capacity to walk in and say, 'We want to have a yarn to you, warning you about things. We want to have a yarn to you about how to not get yourself into a tricky situation.' I had ideas in my head of people such as Kim Beazley and John Howard, who could just say, 'Well, we're going to talk to you.' Also, if there was any suspicion, they could say, 'No. We really want to talk to you, and today we have an ASIO officer in the room with us and we're going to find out exactly what you've been up to. We're interested.' If we don't understand this, we are so foolish. Our role right now has at its apex that this nation become as powerful as possible as quickly as possible. We have to understand the circumstances that we are in. The Russians are very good too; the Russians are excellent. The Chinese are very, very good. The North Koreans have a crack at it. The Iranians and others have a crack at it. But don't think for one second that they're stupid. Don't think that they're off their game. They are on point. We can say, 'No. That's all in the past,' but there's actually more of it now than there was in the past. So I commend this bill and I hope that, in doing so, other people understand what we need to do. I hope they understand the dramatic build-up of the Communist arsenal that even Minister Wong has given reference to. No-one can really explain why it has been built up, and they don't want to tell us why. But I suppose you can divine why. You can sit back and think about why you need the projection of power. I think we could all ask ourselves the question: What was the purpose of a Chinese flotilla circumnavigating Australia? What was the message that was being sent when they conducted live-fire exercises in the Tasman Sea adjacent to Sydney? Why were they doing that? Were they sending a message to say, 'Don't step out of line or you'll be in trouble'? Why did they send their research vessel, which was obviously finding any intelligence it could, through Bass Strait? Why do they hack into our computers? Why do they send vessels to monitor all electronic communications off Rockhampton? Why do they do that? And, between Silicon Valley and China, why are they absolutely scrambling and doing a very, very good job right now of getting themselves to the apex of AI for their assessment processes. Why do they incarcerate Uighurs? Why did they build access roads into India? Why did Wang Yi go to Timor-Leste, Port Moresby, Vanuatu, the Solomon Islands, Kiribati and have communications with the Cook Islands and have a look at Fiji? Why would they do that? Were they bored? Is there nothing on? Or are they thinking about encirclement and the capacity to put us under threat? I'll close on this: if we get this wrong, people will say, 'They're going to invade.' No. That's too expensive. I'll give you the No. 1 thing they have in mind. Whether you like it or not, the trading currency for Australia is the US dollar, which we are all dealing in. Now imagine if you were forced or knew that you had to trade in renminbi, the Chinese yuan. At that point, they would determine the value of everything in Australia. They would have completely dominated Australia economically without ever firing a bullet. 16:14 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina I am surprised that there is not a long list of people wishing to address this issue. It's been left up to the member for New England and me to talk on this very important topic. Nobody gets it better than two former deputy chairs of the National Security Committee. We have both seen and heard things within a framework of that role that are very disturbing, and no doubt the government also has information before it that is a worry. Why else would the Deputy Prime Minister, the Minister for Defence, the member for Corio, say that we live in the most precarious times since World War II? That is why this bill and other measures that the government is taking are important. I appreciate that, for social media exercises, reducing HECS debt sees just about every Labor member on their feet making 10-minute statements, even though the legislation has long since left the House of Representatives. I understand that. We live in a political environment. We do what we need to do. But, when it comes to bills such as the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 1) and Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 2 ) 2025, I am a little bit disappointed that there aren't more—any—Labor speakers who want to get to their feet and talk about this, because it is important. Our national security has to be the No. 1 issue facing the government, this parliament, because, if we keep our people safe, that is our main objective. The member for New England summed that up very succinctly. It's not about worrying about reds under the bed. It's not about being alarmist. It's about making sure that we have the measures in place, in a world being taken over by artificial intelligence, in a world being overtaken by nefarious characters, in a world where sometimes the great unknown is very much on our doorstep. We have to be ready. The price of peace is eternal vigilance, and when you have two former deputy chairs of the security committee, the No. 1 security committee in this nation, willing to speak on this, you know it's an important topic, you know it's an important bill. These complementary bills seek to extend and expand the compulsory questioning powers in division 3 of part III of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979 (ASIO Act). That's what these bills are about. That's the substance. But, more than that, the member for New England and I know how important they are because we've heard, we've seen and we've lived the sort of evidence you get before that committee. You know that the government has a responsibility—and a huge responsibility it is—to take every precaution to keep our citizens safe. We've seen in recent times, for example, the Dural caravan incident. You turn on the television on any given day to incidents around the world, but, more specifically, they're happening on an increasing basis here at home. Often, they are mad and bad and sad people, but they are occurring. Since 7 October 2023, in capital cities but also in my hometown of Wagga Wagga, we've seen people taking the Middle East situation way too far. In fact, there is a person appearing in court next month in Wagga Wagga for the window displays that he put up. That will be a real test case for this sort of situation. I'll leave the court to worry about that. That is their place to do that. But ASIO needs the powers necessary to do everything it can to keep Australians safe. I have to give plaudits to the people who do keep us safe—these ASIO officials, these top-level intelligence agents. We have very good people in those areas. Mike Burgess and others have done a power of good in keeping us safe. If we know about some of the incidents that have happened, heaven only knows the incidents that perhaps none of us know about that they've actually saved us from and kept Australians safe from. I also want to give a shout-out to the new Assistant Minister for Defence, the member for Wills. I say that because I know he was one of former prime minister Kevin Rudd's chief intelligence people, and I know he had a role in 2024 and up to the election as Special Envoy for Social Cohesion. I've had a number of discussions with the member for Wills in relation to security and public safety, and I regard his experience very highly. It's good that we've got people on both sides of the chamber who are very adept in this regard. I note that the member for Canning, the shadow minister for home affairs, has a deep and abiding interest in this as well. He is a highly regarded and decorated former member of the SAS. We need people like that in our parliament; we truly do. I've got a ban from Russia for being the deputy prime minister during the Morrison years. I wear that as a badge of honour, actually. I didn't want to go to Moscow, anyway—or anywhere else in Russia, for that matter. If they don't want me, that's fine. But, as the member for New England said, they are amongst us—not just Russians but people who we, quite frankly, don't want to have in our country. They come here under the guise of being visitors and great diplomats et cetera. But they come here to try to subvert people. They come here to this building to sway people to do the wrong thing. We need to be aware of that. The member for New England was, I think, not being alarmist when he said we all, as members of parliament, particularly those who hold ministerial positions, need to be very careful about who we meet, what we say and what we agree to, because there are people out there who would take people of good faith and intentions down as quick as look at them to promote their evil. The member for New England also mentioned the situation with China circumnavigating Australia. It was for no good reason that China did this. I listened very closely to the defence minister saying, 'Well, it was in open, international waters.' Yes, it was, but why would China be circumnavigating our nation? Why would they be doing live firing exercises in the Tasman Sea off the Sydney coastline for any good reason? This is not good. We need to send the strongest possible advice to our largest trading friends that friends don't do this to one another. I can well remember when then prime minister Tony Abbott made his 'shirtfront'— An honourable member: Remarks. Mr McCORMACK 219646 remarks—yes—over the downing of an aircraft by the Russian military, and the next thing we knew was, off the Queensland coast, we had the Russian fleet. Now, Putin obviously wanted to flex his muscles. We've all seen him with the shirt off, pumping out his chest—yeah, good on ya—but this is not behaviour we should be seeing from world leaders and from countries with whom, quite frankly, in this day and age, we should be doing everything we can to promote peace. We live in a troubled world—we really do. I mentioned AI before. We just have to be on our guard. We have to make sure that we have not only the right defence personnel—in our Navy, Army and Air Force—but the right intelligence officers. We need the right investment to ensure that ASIO and other intelligence and counterintelligence organisations have the right resources and people in the right places right now to ensure they can continue to keep Australians safe. These bills amend the compulsory questioning powers in the ASIO Act to expand the scope of adult questioning warrants to include sabotage, promotion of communal violence, attacks on Australia's defence system and serious threats to Australia's territorial and border integrity in addition to espionage and politically motivated violence including terrorism and acts of foreign interference. I'm sad to say that we have seen examples of every single one of those in recent times, and it is worrying. Not to place too much of a thing on it, but even our parliamentary process was interrupted in question time today by three people protesting—and they shouldn't have. I'm not against protestors—I am not—but it should not be in our house of democracy when we're trying to debate important topics. At question time, we should not see people standing up and being unruly and disorderly. I do hope that the Speaker finds out who those people are and gives them a lifetime ban. Why muck around? Don't give them a 12-month ban; give them a lifetime ban from this place. They hold up a sign today; what do they do tomorrow if they're allowed to get away with it? If a member has signed those people in—well, whatever the Speaker has at his disposal to admonish that member, he should use, too. Let's remember: they were in the Speaker's gallery. They had to have a ticket to get in there, and that ticket had to be signed off by a member. So I hope that member who signed in those three unruly people is shaking in their boots as I speak. These bills also amend the eligibility and termination provisions for prescribed authorities to ensure the independence and impartiality of persons appointed to the role. We know that, if we have people questioning those of ill repute, as a nation, we will abide by the international rule of law. We do that always, even with our military. I've been with our military on those parliamentary trips where we've seen our military in action. They take every course of action, legal and otherwise, to ensure what they're doing is the right thing and is covered under international rule of law. The same does not apply to our enemies—it does not. These bills also introduce additional reporting requirements to ensure the Attorney-General—and I compliment the member for Greenway in her ascension to that role; I think she'll do a fine job—is made aware of any relevant information regarding conduct under a compulsory questioning warrant. It will require that post-charge questioning occurs only before a prescribed authority who is a retired judge and will make the framework permanent by repealing the sunset provision. We do what we need to do to keep Australians safe. Whether it's a Labor government or a coalition government, we cannot afford to water down any provisions to keep Australians safe. I do have confidence in the government to do the right thing, because the protection of our people is too important not to get right, and we need to make sure we do everything we can in that regard. Bill 2 also amends the Intelligence Services Act 2001 to permit the PJCIS to undertake further review of the operation's effectiveness and implications of the framework three years after the commencement of the bill. We have Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security oversight of this. That's important so that parliamentarians get a say along with the National Security Committee and the relevant ministers right up to the Prime Minister. That's the way it should be. I don't go along with the Greens—thank goodness there's only one of them in the House of Representatives—wanting to have all sorts of oversight on these. God help us if ever the Greens get anybody anywhere near the National Security Committee, because then we'd all be in trouble. But I do recommend these bills. They're important, they're necessary, and they will keep Australians safe. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced. Ordered that this bill be reported to the House without amendment. Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025 143

Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025

Second Reading 143 16:30 Mr CONROY 249127 Shortland The Pacific is our home. It is in our interest to foster a resilient, connected region that enables all our economies to grow and our people to prosper. The Albanese government has brought new energy and ambition to revitalise our Pacific partnership after a decade of neglect. We're using all tools of statecraft, security cooperation, development cooperation and people-to-people links to do this. We're also supporting the services that underpin economic growth, such as banking, aviation and critical infrastructure. The Pacific looks to us first for support. That is what good neighbours do. We're also facing a more uncertain international environment and we are in a permanent contest in the Pacific, both the Minister for Foreign Affairs and I have repeated that many times. That is why it's been so important that there has been such a transformational change in Australia's approach the Pacific since we were elected in 2022. We've signed landmark treaties with Tuvalu and Nauru, creating a safer region and advancing our position as a security partner of choice. We've strengthened cooperation with Papua New Guinea through our bilateral security agreement and our landmark national rugby league deal. These are both underpinned by strategic trust. We're also getting our relationship with the Solomon Islands on a better footing by building its police force. This confirms our position as their security partner of choice. We're also building a proud track record assisting one another after natural disasters. Most recently, we worked to support Vanuatu after its earthquake on 17 December last year, getting rescue and humanitarian teams on the ground within 24 hours of Vanuatu's request. And we shouldn't forget that, when Australia was hit by the terrible bushfires of 2019-20, Fiji sent 54 of its soldiers to help our emergency responses. I will always be grateful for that. Our investments have helped ensure every Pacific Islands Forum country will have an undersea telecommunication cable by the end of 2025, to bolster economic growth. I met with Prime Minister Teo, of Tuvalu, yesterday to discuss their recent connection, and we're building people-to-people links. A love of sport is a connection we share with the Pacific, and we're building sports cooperation, whether it's rugby league with PNG; soccer with Vanuatu and the Solomon Islands; netball throughout the Pacific; or rugby union with Fiji, Tonga and Samoa. Sport is bringing our countries closer together. We're committed to growing and strengthening the Pacific Australia Labour Mobility Scheme so it delivers on the region's ambitions for more skills and opportunities. This includes expanding opportunities for the Pacific and Timor-Leste and embedding a skills dividend in the scheme by helping fill vital worker shortages in regional and rural Australia. And we've created the first ever Pacific permanent migration pathway through the Pacific engagement visa, responding to a longstanding request from our Pacific partners. The first ballot for that PEV had 56,000 applications for only 3,000 spots, demonstrating the strong support throughout the Pacific for this important scheme. Our engagement with the Pacific is underpinned by this government's recognition that climate change is the No. 1 concern of the Pacific. All this has helped us to build transformational relationships—for example, our landmark Australia-Tuvalu Falepili Union responds to Tuvalu's position at the frontline of the climate crisis. I recognise this has enabled us to unlock greater security corporation. The Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025, which we're debating right now, is part of our commitment to our Pacific neighbours. The Albanese government places a high priority on ensuring that the Pacific and Timor-Leste remain connected to the global financial system. The Pacific, unfortunately, has experienced the fastest withdrawal of correspondent banking relationships anywhere in the world. Just as the Pacific suffers the worst consequences of climate change, its businesses, workers and people are being disproportionately affected by bearing the cost of debanking. Secure access to the global financial system and banking services is critical for economic growth, financial inclusion and overall stability. That's a statement of the bleeding obvious, but it's very important. At a national level, banking services mean government and businesses can engage in international trade, progress projects for infrastructure and essential services, and maintain and grow their economies. At a local level, banking services allow people to start up a new business and to maintain and grow their existing businesses. They enable workers to send money home to support their families and communities. For example, we've seen for many years how significant remittances can be. Under the Pacific Australia Labour Mobility scheme, workers from the Pacific contribute to Australia by filling labour gaps in regional and rural areas and specific industries. Right now, over 30,000 PALM workers are filling those labour gaps, and, again, on behalf of the government, I want to say how grateful I am to them, their families and their countries for assisting the Australian economy. At the same time, those workers are sending, on average, $1,500 per month to their families and communities back home. I've visited many communities in the Pacific and Timor-Leste, and I've seen firsthand how this income directly alleviates poverty in local communities. It helps pay for food and other essentials. It pays for education and medicine and is even used to start small businesses, contributing to economic growth and job creation. Importantly, it's also dealing with gender equality and the divide that we see in many nations around the Pacific. Banking services are essential in supporting remittances and funds transfers through people, organisations, businesses and nations. Australia and our Pacific partners want to avoid the situation where Pacific nations are debanked and lose access to timely and affordable cross-border payments and banking services. This is not about any individual country; this is about enhancing our cooperation with our Pacific island neighbours. This is about listening to their needs and working together on solutions. We all want to live in a region that is peaceful, stable and prosperous—a region where our partnerships are grounded in respect, including respect for sovereignty. We're committed to doing our part to contribute to this vision. For over 140 years, Australian banks have been a partner to the Pacific region. Today, three Pacific nations use the Australian dollar as their national currency, underscoring our economic interdependence. In fact, the Foreign minister of Nauru reminded me about how generous they are to let us use their currency in Australia! But banks are not just financial intermediaries; they are symbols of our commitment to the region. They are a key to stronger trading and investment relationships between us and our Pacific neighbours. Their presence in the Pacific ensures that our neighbours can stay connected to the global financial system and experience secure, reliable and high-quality services. I've directly engaged with Pacific leaders and Australian bank executives to find ways to ensure that we have an enduring banking presence in the region. Australian banks' Pacific operations are lauded for maintaining high standards of service quality and high rates of regulatory compliance, helping to thwart financial crime. The importance of this cannot be overstated. Economic instability creates vulnerabilities that can be exploited by transnational criminals and other bad actors. Ensuring that the Pacific has a robust financial system mitigates financial crime risks and supports economic resilience. A financially stable Pacific benefits Australia, and I thank the Commonwealth Bank of Australia for providing banking services to Nauru in our national interest. This is a critical part of the Nauru-Australia Treaty. Under that treaty, Australia committed to ensuring that Nauru will not be left without a bank when the Bendigo and Adelaide Bank departs this year. The treaty also reflects our shared commitment to security that is led by the Pacific family, which is in our deep national interest. I also acknowledge ANZ's commitment to remaining in eight Pacific markets and Timor-Leste. ANZ has been in the Pacific for 140 years, playing an incredibly important role. I remember meeting the regional ANZ manager in the Solomon Islands, where he briefed me about how they reduced their fees during the COVID period for admittances because they knew there were thousands of Solomon Islander workers stuck in Australia, trying to send money back to sustain their families, when the region was devastated by the economic impact of COVID. The guarantee contained in this bill will support meaningful access to face-to-face banking services. It will also support enhancements to ANZ's banking services, including its digital banking services. ANZ will continue to support access to international money transfers and correspondent banking services, and will also support Pacific countries through infrastructure financing in line with the bank's credit risk policies. The guarantee is a responsible and low-risk way to secure ANZ's long-term commitment to the Pacific. Supporting the Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025 is how members in this House can advance our national interest. A secure, stable and inclusive financial system in the Pacific is not just beneficial to the region; it is in Australia's national interest. We're also doing our part to address the structural factors that are leading banks to exit the Pacific. This includes helping to build digital identity infrastructure in seven Pacific jurisdictions; building the capacity of financial intelligence units so Pacific governments can respond to money laundering and terrorism financing risks; trying to find ways to address the lack of scale in Pacific countries' financial markets—we're doing this in partnership with the World Bank; I met with the deputy head of the World Bank yesterday to discuss this important project—and supporting secure and affordable channels for Pacific workers to remit money, which is something we're doing with New Zealand and the European Union. I'm pleased to be part of a government progressing this important piece of legislation. We must ensure that Australia remains the partner of choice for the Pacific. Let us be clear that safeguarding banking services and the financial system is all about underpinning greater economic resilience and security in our region. We're committed to listening to and working together with our Pacific neighbours on issues that matter to us both. This bill is a clear demonstration of our commitment to do this. I commend the bill to the House. 16:42 Mr WOOD E0F La Trobe I thank the minister for his eagerness to support our great friends in the Pacific. I know his intentions are well and truly for the right reasons. It is the same on the side of the House; I acknowledge the member for Riverina, the former shadow minister for international development and the Pacific, who I know will be speaking after me. I make the point that the previous government never neglected our Pacific neighbours; in actual fact, it delivered a record $2.7 billion in Pacific support in 2021-22 across aid infrastructure, health and security. We became the first and only country with diplomatic posts in every Pacific Islands Forum nation, and we expanded regional security through the $2 billion Pacific Marine Security Program, including the delivery of the Guardian class patrol boat—something so important for our region. When it comes to this bill, the Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025, we definitely support the bill in principle. We support the intentions of the bill. However, we believe it needs to go to the Senate Economics Legislation Committee because there are questions which need to be answered in regard to it. One of the first things I will talk about is that the local bank over there in the South Pacific, the Bank South Pacific itself, is ASX listed. I met with a number of the executives the other day, and they gave me a bit of a rundown of what they do; I will just go through it here. Ninety-seven per cent of the BSP is owned by the South Pacific, making it the fundamental driver of the region's prosperity. The PNG government owns 22 per cent of South Pacific superannuation funds and is the largest shareholder in the BSP, with 36 per cent. It is one of the largest employers, with 4,600 employees. One of the points I'd like to make is that we want to make sure their voices are heard. When it comes to remote areas in the Pacific, that's where, I've been advised, the Bank South Pacific does a lot of good work on the ground. When we had the situation where money was given back in COVID times to Red Cross, where they supported other organisations providing funding—we just want to make sure we don't, as a country, do the wrong thing by the Bank South Pacific. With the best of intentions, I think the bill needs to be examined further. The Liberal-National coalition's track record in the Pacific has always been pragmatic: an infrastructure led engagement combining geopolitical interests with development goals. The coalition strongly supports the continuing commitment to the Pacific that began with early governments trying to address contemporary strategic and economic challenges. We know those challenges in the area, and I do acknowledge the work the government is doing. This should be an area with a bipartisan approach because it's in the interests of all Australians. This bill empowers the government to guarantee Australian bank operations in the Pacific using the consolidated revenue fund to provide financial backing should Australian banks in the Pacific face significant risk or default. The aim is not merely to secure continued bank operations but to maintain vital financial links for the Pacific island countries to the global financial system, especially for remittance, aid, and trade. We heard the minister rightly talk about the PALM program. That's something where those from the Pacific islands come and work in Australia. It could be in aged care. It could be in agriculture. The money they raise goes back to the families back home. The coalition strongly supports the intention of the bill. We have concerns about how it's been drafted—as I said, further examination by the Senate Economics Legislation Committee would be important. Can I just say one thing having previously been a member of government: we always think we've got it right and we're doing the right thing, but there are always unintended consequences, and I think that, in a good democracy, that should be played out to hear from those who may be impacted to come up with what could be a better outcome for all those involved. Understandably, market conditions have made the Pacific region commercially challenging for banks and resulted in the de-risking and withdrawal of banking relationships, threatening access to basic financial services for many Pacific communities. If Australian banks withdraw, others will fill the void with alternative financial networks that may lack transparency or fall outside the regulatory standards. That's why it is so important for Australia to be the good neighbour and good friend—not only for security but also for social reasons and supporting our Pacific neighbours. While the bill's intention is worthy, several concerns deserve attention. The bill creates a special appropriation from the consolidated revenue fund that is unlimited in scope and time. While this offers negotiating flexibility, it also raises transparency and fiscal oversight issues, potentially exposing Australian taxpayers to unknowing risk. Remember: this is Australian taxpayers' money. The bill and its mandatory materials lack clarity on several fronts, including the definition of low risk exposures to be guaranteed. Treasury says that financial risk is low and that the future guarantees will be time-limited and capped, but there is nothing in the bill that requires that. There is limited clarity on how future guarantees will be managed. The process for dispute resolution between banks and the government currently has no explicit mechanism in the bill for parliamentary oversight or regulatory review of the guarantees and their impact. Clearly, definitions are needed specifying the types of risk and exposures to be covered and outlining objective criteria eligibility to reduce the uncertainty risk of future disputes—as examples, tying guarantees to measurable commitments by banks, maintaining service standards, investing in digital banking improvement, supporting financial inclusion and capacity-building initiatives should be looked at. Banks should be encouraged to work with regional partners, as I've said before, and harmonise regulation and explore sustainable market based alternatives so the guarantees to bridge to longer-term solutions are not permanent subsidies. For example, work in Bank South Pacific, because I think that will be a good way to go forward. As I was saying before, in the former government we had a great respect for our Pacific neighbours, and that contribution, whether it be from security or aid, has always been important. I know the ANZ Bank announced in March 2025 that they would be one of the first recipients of the Pacific Banking guarantee of a maximum of $2 billion. The 10-year bank guarantee supported its operations in the region. As I said, we think that is very important. ANZ will be paying an undisclosed annual fee to the government for the guarantee, but exactly how it will go hasn't been made public. Many Pacific countries depend on correspondent banking, where larger banks like ANZ help local banks process payments and currency exchange. Since 2011, correspondent banking relationships in the south Pacific have fallen by 60 per cent, so it's so important Australia steps in and does its role there. The opposition are supportive, and we will not oppose the bill, but it should go to the Senate Economics Legislation Committee. There are questions that need to be asked. There is uncapped appropriation—no maximum dollar limit. There's no end date—the guarantee power is open ended. There is limited clarity on how the future guarantees will be managed. Why is there no limit. Why is there no sunset clause, and what oversight will apply to future guarantees? Again, to all the Pacific islands, we, as one, are supporting you. 16:50 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith As a Pacific nation, Australia is a partner that the region can count on. We share an ocean and we also share a future. Australia is committed to supporting our regional neighbours, listening to Pacific priorities and delivering on our collective interests. Together, we're building a stronger Pacific family, upholding our common values so we can all make our own decisions as strong sovereign nations, free to grow and to live together peacefully. Our region is stronger together, and we're counting on each other to support the aspirations and wellbeing of our people. These are messages that came through in the trip that myself and the Foreign minister made recently, when we travelled to Fiji, Tonga and Vanuatu. It was my first trip as the Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, and it was a deliberate decision to go to the Pacific to reinforce the importance of that relationship to Australia and to demonstrate to our neighbours and friends how important the Pacific family is to Australia and how we understand the challenges that they are facing, particularly the challenge of dealing with climate change, which is an existential threat to many of those nations. As the Pacific's largest and most comprehensive development partner, our investments are designed to deliver transformative change to improve the lives and livelihoods of all Pacific peoples. As the largest trading partner of many Pacific nations, we're supporting growing markets by reducing the barriers to trade and partnering with local businesses while continuing more than 40 years of tariff-free access into Australia. It was a point that we made on that trip, given what is going on in the international trading environment at the moment. It's having a dramatic effect on many Pacific nations. Some of those Pacific nations do have access into larger markets like the United States and are now facing tariffs on the products that they export to those markets. And, for a small island nation with a limited export potential and a limited export capability, when you are exporting into a market and there are trade challenges, it can make a big difference to the viability of that business, that industry and, ultimately, that country's GDP. That's why we reiterated that point with our Pacific neighbours—that Australia won't be taking a retaliatory approach to the tariffs that have been placed on us by the United States, and we'll make sure that we guarantee the tariff-free access to Australia, particularly for our Pacific neighbours. We've partnered to better integrate our economy, making it easier for people to do business between the countries in which we live, work and study. Our support is focused on inclusive economic growth, sustainable infrastructure, jobs, skills and connectivity. The everyday but essential banking services people rely on are available through the guaranteed presence of Australian banks in nine countries. When Labor was last in government, I was the Parliamentary Secretary for Pacific Island Affairs, so I travelled extensively throughout the Pacific. The one thing I noticed was that, despite the development challenges, most people in the Pacific had a mobile phone and most people in the Pacific used that mobile phone for a lot of their financial transactions, particularly their banking services, as many Australians do today as well. Access to those banking services is vitally important to their security, their livelihoods and their living standards. When those banking services are at risk because of banks pulling out of the Pacific, Australia has an obligation to work with our partner nations in the Pacific to stabilise their banking services, and that's exactly what the Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025 does. It's about ensuring that we are putting in place the measures to provide that confidence in the Pacific banking system. The continuing decline in access to cross-border banking services in the Pacific region and the reduction of Pacific operations by Australian banks are concerns shared by our government and by governments of our regional neighbours. The Pacific, unfortunately, has experienced the fastest withdrawal of correspondent banking relationships anywhere in the world. Over recent years, we have had some Australian banks reduce their Pacific operations. Secure access to the global financial system and banking services is critical for economic growth, financial inclusion and overall stability. We know that this access can offer life-changing opportunities for families and, importantly, businesses and communities in our region. This bill allows the Commonwealth to offer support to eligible Australian banks to maintain their Pacific operations by providing a guarantee that transfers risk of default on low-risk exposures to the Commonwealth. The bill provides a special appropriation from the Consolidated Revenue Fund, allowing the Commonwealth to pay any valid claims for the full amount of any guarantee in a timely manner in the unlikely event of a default. We all remember the global financial crisis and how close Australia and many other developed nations came to a run on the banks. Thankfully, the Rudd government acted quickly at the time when that risk began to materialise and provided a government backing of Australians' deposits through that period. That action by the Rudd government stabilised the Australian banking system, and it also stabilised our economy, which meant that the government could then go about the government support that was provided to ensure that Australians got through that difficult period. We got through in better shape than most OECD nations. We didn't have a recession; we had small changes in unemployment. We didn't have rampant inflation, and we were able to stabilise our economy. It demonstrates how important government guarantees are at moments of economic uncertainty. This bill provides that stability and that guarantee for our Pacific neighbours in the wake of the uncertainty resulting from the reduction in banking services in the Pacific. This guarantee is not a subsidy. Banks will pay a fee for the guarantee, as they should, and provision of this guarantee is not about any individual country. It's about enhancing cooperation with our Pacific island neighbours and is responsible for low-risk measures to assist in securing Australia's banking commitment to the Pacific. We place a high priority on ensuring that the Pacific, Papua New Guinea and Timor-Leste remain connected to the global financial system, and we share the concerns of many of our regional neighbours. This guarantee will make our region safer and more stable and make sure loved ones, families and communities can continue to access their money. Australia is a respectful, reliable and transparent partner, responding to the Pacific region's needs and priorities. In uncertain times, Australia and the Pacific are counting on each other as we build a region that is a peaceful, stable and prosperous one. Australia, as the region's largest economic partner, is committed to working through the regional institutions that are in place, particularly the Pacific Islands Forum, towards our shared goals of stability and prosperity. Greater integration of our economy, particularly of our trading systems and business transactions, is making it easier for Pacific people in business to connect and investment to flow across the region. We've listened, we've learned and we're working together on a Pacific led, Australian backed solution, and we will continue to elevate the voices of our Pacific neighbours on issues that matter most to them to ensure a stable and prosperous region into the future. 17:00 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina If we believe that all the important words on the Pacific begin with the letter F—faith, family and football—we should add 'finance' as well. Certainly, the Pacific Banking Guarantee Bill 2025 does that. We need to be as agile and as adept with the Pacific as anything at the moment. If it's good enough to spend $600 million on a National Rugby League club to come out of Pasifika, with both Port Moresby and Townsville potentially hosting home games, then surely it is good enough to guarantee the banking provisions of our Blue Pacific friends. There are, however, some questions that need to be answered. Why is there no limit on the total amount of taxpayer exposure? That's a very good question. Why is there no sunset clause with the provisions of this bill? What oversight will apply to future guarantees? Treasury says the risk is low, but what does that in fact mean? So far, only the ANZ guarantee has been announced. Will there be any others? The impact that the Pacific Australia Labour Mobility scheme, the PALM scheme, has on local economies in the Pacific is absolutely enormous. According to World Bank figures, 44 per cent of Tonga's gross domestic product is made up by remittance which is sent home by those working abroad. In Samoa it's 30 per cent, in Vanuatu it's 21 per cent and in Fiji it's nine per cent. From 2018 to 2021, an estimated $64.15 million in savings and remittances were sent to the Pacific, and it paid an amount of $22 million in income tax. The United Nations estimates that 15 per cent of each migrant worker's pay cheque is sent back home, with Australian government figures suggesting that this amount could reach as high as 40 per cent. The problem is that about 10 per cent of that amount is then lost in the foreign exchange, meaning that tens of millions of dollars that could be going back to the Pacific are not. When I was the shadow minister for international development and the Pacific, I spoke out against this because if it's good enough for hardworking individuals to come here and to do all the jobs that Australians either won't or can't do, then it should be good enough for Australians to protect their remittances to ensure that their families and friends back home are benefiting from the fruits of their labour. We must as a country make sure that as much of that money as possible is ending up in the hands of the intended relatives to stimulate the local villages, the towns and the cities of our Pacific region and not as a profit line on the balance sheets of major banks—banks which, I have to say, as part of their social licence to operate in Australia, should be helping out in the Pacific. And, whilst they mightn't make the generous profit lines that they make here in Australia, the fact that they are able to make such generous billions of dollars of annual profits here in Australia means there must be some responsibility and social licence to also operate in the Pacific. Yes, they won't be making billions of dollars, but they will make money. Banks don't operate if they don't make money. I commend the ANZ for stepping up; I do. It's important. The coalition also very much stepped up when we were in government, and I commend the work that started under the Howard administration, particularly through the work of Marise Payne, former foreign affairs minister and senator for New South Wales. In government between 2013 and 2022, we as a coalition delivered a record $2.7 billion in Pacific support. Indeed, that was just for the 2021-22 year across aid, infrastructure, health and security. We became the first and only country with diplomatic posts in every Pacific Islands Forum nation. We heard the Prime Minister yesterday talking about the PIF and its importance. Well, we had an ambassador, a diplomatic post, in very one of the island nations. We expanded regional security through the $2 billion Pacific Maritime Security Program, including the delivery of Guardian class patrol boats. I was there in Vanuatu when one of these boats was launched. The locals were very, very happy with it, let me tell you. It's good enough for China to come in and build these lavish and grand buildings that they then have to maintain and upkeep; they much prefer having vessels they can operate as coastguards against illegal fishing in their waters, because that's one of the biggest dangers to them. We know why China is making investments in the Pacific, and we know why they are absolutely wanting to roll out communications infrastructure in the Pacific. We know why that is the case. But the Pacific also understand that Australia will always be the very best friend that they have, and that goes back to those F's I talked about. We share values and principles of family, of faith, of football and, of the Pacific banking arrangements, with finance. We will continue to work constructively with the government on these particular issues. Remittances are really important. My active work in this regard, when I was the shadow minister, did lead to some constructive changes, such that more of the remittances were actually ending up in the pockets of those who did the work, rather than in the pockets of perhaps the bank et cetera, where it was just not necessary; they make enough money. At that time, the government had a program called Empowering Pacific Migrants through Remittances. The money went to funding a website. While it might have ticked some boxes on paper, it did very little to solve the problem. Requiring foreign-exchange providers to have transparent, upfront pricing by eliminating the fees in the exchange rates would empower the individual worker to make a more informed choice, instead of, let's face it, preying on the financially illiterate. Not everybody reads their financial documents when they're signing contracts and arrangements when they're signing up to a bank. While this is the case in Australia with a lot of people, it certainly happens in the Pacific. They just want much of their remittances to go back to where they are intended, and they do a power of work. I was really disappointed with how the government treated the PALM scheme as a union grab. It attempted to unionise the workforce that came here under the PALM scheme and other arrangements, such that they were going to get a minimum number of hours. That's all well and good, and people should be paid for the work that they do, but that shouldn't come at the expense of the farmers, who are then, under the Labor government scheme, ending up paying for people who are doing nothing, paying for people who are idle. We all know how seasonal the work is with farming, particularly in the horticultural industry and in some of the other industries that are part of the PALM arrangements. Because I complained loudly and bitterly about this, it was changed. But, as I understand, it was only changed up until July, this month. It was about to be re-examined by the future government, at the time, but the future government unfortunately ended up being Labor re-elected, on 3 May. However, we cannot make the system with minimum numbers of hours. What ends up happening is the farmer does not want to pay a minimum number of hours, because they may not have that work available at the time. They then don't employ the PALM workers. They either do the work themselves, or they just don't have the PALM workers onsite, so the PALM workers miss out, and the farmers miss out. The number of farmers who were not participating in the PALM scheme dipped, and it dipped alarmingly. That is why I insisted that Minister Conroy as well as Minister Burke do something about it at the time. Thankfully, something was done, but those provisions were only for until July this year, and it remains to be seen what will happen with that, because Labor was trying to unionise that scheme, as only Labor can do. The people who were missing out were our Australian farmers and the Pacific workers. We need a system that's going to be put in place to help them, but this particular bill does provide the government with an ongoing, uncapped appropriation to cover any future costs that the Commonwealth may incur in providing a Pacific banking guarantee to an Australian bank. As I said before, Australian banks do need to participate. On 14 March, the ANZ announced it would be the first recipient of the Pacific banking guarantee. It was a maximum of $2 billion for a decade-long bank guarantee to support its operations in the region. I thank NAB, National Australia Bank, for its previous iterations and its previous involvement with the Pacific, but, unfortunately, what we've seen in recent times is a withdrawal of banking services from the Pacific. What you end up with when you have a withdrawal of the big four banking services—it's hard enough to keep them in the regions, as you would well know, Deputy Speaker Sharkie, from your experience in South Australia, no doubt—is other players moving into the space. 'Other players' is often code for rip-off merchants. What you see is international organisations—and we can't always rely on some of those banking providers from overseas—who move into the Pacific and take advantage of what you could almost term the financial illiteracy or good intention of some, but it wouldn't matter whether they were Pacific or anybody else. If there's a space to be moved into, if there's a vacuum, it leads to people who are not of good intent coming in and taking advantage of those people who just want to come here to Australia to do the hard work that we can't find workers to do here of our own accord and send their remittances home. Many Pacific countries depend on correspondent banking, where larger banks such as ANZ help local banks process payments and currency exchanges. Since 2011, correspondent banking relationships in the South Pacific have fallen by—wait for this—60 per cent. Without corresponding banking services, Pacific nations lose access to foreign currencies and international payment systems, and that stymies the flow of payments such as remittances, which I mentioned before, overseas investments; and foreign aid. If Australian banks withdraw, others, as I said, will fill the void. Alternative financial networks often lack transparency or fall outside of regulatory standards. In other words, they are rip-off merchants, and they will take advantage of you as quick as they will look at you, particularly in the Pacific. What we then see is people basically being robbed. If Australian banks withdraw, others will move in. The bill is about helping Australian neighbours stay connected to the global financial system and maintaining Australia's financial presence in the region. At this critical juncture, when the Pacific is a very, very contested space in this precarious geopolitical environment that we have found ourselves in, we need to be the very best of friends with the Pacific. We might sometimes provide different infrastructure than what our major trading partners often seem to find themselves providing, but, rest assured, the assistance that we will give in financial services, cyclone-proof buildings, road networks, strengthening seawalls, health, vaccines, helping women, helping people with disabilities, foreign aid and foreign development—we will be providing that, but I don't think China will. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced. Ordered that this bill be reported to the House without amendment. CONDOLENCES 150 CONDOLENCES Nixon, Hon. Peter James, AO 150 17:16 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina In her very good book of 2020, John McEwan: right man, right place, right time, Senator Bridget McKenzie interviewed the late, great Peter Nixon. Trade is an important thing at the moment. We're often talking about the need to boost trade and increase our trading relations with other countries. In the interview that Senator McKenzie did in her book, she referred to Mr Nixon in several pages, because they formed such a good relationship—Black Jack and Mr Nixon. She interviewed him: … former Country Party minister Mr Nixon says that history has misremembered McEwen's trade philosophy. "McEwen was wise enough to know, and he would have changed as the world changed," Nixon says on tariffs. "It's something people never understand. He was far sighted. He'd look ahead to see what the storms were and he'd be ready to meet them." Peter Nixon and Black Jack McEwen, the former Country Party leader, had a great affinity. They understood, as the trade storms swirled around the world, the importance of Australia as a trading nation and as a trading partner and what we needed to do more of in this regard. Furthermore, in her book, it says: What did McEwen try to protect Australia's infant industry from? "What's been lost in the debate is dumping," Peter Nixon explains, "A hell of a lot of countries in those days were over-manufacturing and dumping. We were always within the world trade rule with our operations." And it's a very compelling insight, this particular book, into what was going on at the time. What it spelled out was the fact that the likes of Peter Nixon and John McEwen—we as a nation were playing within the rules. We were trying to increase our trade. We were doing as good Country Party or National Party members do, and that was protecting the interests of our farmers. Mr Nixon was no different in that regard. Here's another really interesting quote, because it relates very much to how we're faring now with the tariffs being imposed by the United States. The book says: As Nixon recalled: He (McEwen) believed that the tariffs granted were too high. What used to happen, a company would be given tariff protection and then the unions would squeeze the company for higher wages. What people don't understand is that when the war finished … We're referring to the Second World War, here. It goes on: … we had migrants pouring into the country that had to be employed. There was a hell of a strong trade union movement in those days. In those days, anybody who worked anywhere was a trade unionist. And so, we had a high wage level compared to our competitors internationally … The more things change, the more they stay the same! It goes on: Tariffs were the answer. And sometimes the unions would strike for a wage rise and that was granted by the wage body at the time and that would put the damn industry at risk. Again, from the more things change, the more they stay the same. What we saw with Peter Nixon, Doug Anthony and Ian Sinclair were people who Mr McEwan could look to as people who would very much take the Country Party forward. He mentored them. He supported the Liberal Party. They formed the coalition, which has been the best form of government, obviously, that could possibly be put in place. But rest assured the Hon. Peter James Nixon AO was an amazing contributor to public life, to the life of this parliament, to the growth of the Country Party—now the National Party—and to cabinet processes. He had a number of ministerial appointments, but, more than that, he never forgot the people in Gippsland, because that's where he was from and that's who he represented. Certainly, he wanted to make sure that the people of Orbost, where he grew up farming, and the people of the wider to Gippsland area were always first and foremost in any of his considerations. Yes, he played a big game on the national stage and on the international stage, working with the likes of Anthony and Sinclair and McEwen, those great names of the Country Party past, but he ensured that Gippsland was indeed always remembered and always advocated for. He was incredibly proud of the people he served and the region he represented. He served as a federal government minister under five prime ministers in a 22-year political career. He passed away at the age of 97. But even after his long, distinguished and decorated political career, he continued to serve. I know that he was one of the movers and shakers in the Australian Football League. Football was one of his great passions. But more than that, there were so many other areas of endeavour that Peter Nixon put his mind to. We certainly mourn his loss. We certainly know that his family will greatly miss him. He lived a long life, but it was very much a productive life. He was very much still contributing right up to the very end. We admire him. We respected him. We will miss him. Vale Peter Nixon, and sincere condolences to all your family and wide circle of friends. 17:22 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon It's a great honour to follow a former leader of the National Party and former deputy prime minister to speak about Peter Nixon. I got to know Peter Nixon through the Richmond Football Club. As a matter of fact, pretty much every time I went to a Richmond game, Peter Nixon would be there, and I was incredibly fond of Peter Nixon. He was someone who always greeted you with a really big, warm smile, was always up for a chat and loved the Richmond footy club, so, when you went to the football to get away from politics, he would always know and understand that and would always be happy to talk football with you. But every now and again, the conversation would get onto politics as well. He was someone who had incredibly sound judgement and incredibly astute judgement, and I always found it fantastic to be able to have conversations with him about politics because I knew and understood I was talking to someone who'd lived through some great eras of coalition government. Not only that, during those times he was someone who always reached across the coalition aisle and knew and understood that a successful coalition is the best way that this country gets governed. We've heard references to his relationship to Menzies. It was wonderful to hear and see about the mentoring role that Menzies took with Peter Nixon. It showed how important it is, especially when it comes to the right side of politics, that there really shouldn't be a party barrier to how we grow, support, make sure we stay strong and make sure that we are a party of government in this nation. It wasn't just Menzies who took on a mentoring role with Peter Nixon. After Menzies retired and the sad and sudden passing of Harold Holt, obviously McMahon took over, and Peter Nixon had an incredibly close relationship with him even though they were very different personalities. And then, of course, under the Fraser government Nixon almost became an equal with Fraser and the other giants of that time in the way they governed this nation. It's a bit of a lesson for us on our side of politics that Peter Nixon always stood up for the Fraser government. Sure, there are always things that you could do better, but they steered this nation through the aftermath of the complete and utter wreckage of this nation by the Whitlam government. People tend to forget the context in which they came back to power, but Whitlam had basically overseen the destruction of our economy through stagflation. One of the mottos of those times on our side was 'Turn the lights on,' because, basically, people were really worried about what was happening to our nation. Nixon worked very closely with Fraser to make sure that they resurrected the nation. They were very, very good friends. It showed you how important it is; if we're going to work together, you have got to make sure that there are those friendships across the political aisle when it comes to the Liberal Party and the National Party. He had a long career in the federal parliament—over 21 years. Now, for those of us who have served for a decade or more, over 21 years is a hell of a long time to be in this place, but he made a significant contribution during all of those 21 years. He didn't waste one day of them. It's quite interesting when you serve for that length of time; the party he served in had three different name changes during that period of time. That shows the length of your service here! He started off as a member of the Australian Country Party, then became a member of the National Country Party and then finally served for the National Party of Australia. He was a cabinet minister for an extended period of time. He was the Minister for the Interior. He was the Minister for Shipping and Transport. He was the Minister for Primary Industry—in those times especially, an incredibly important role. And he was also the Postmaster-General. I always have a slight fondness for people who have been the Postmaster-General. Of course, we don't have that title anymore, but my grandfather worked for what used to be the Postmaster-General when he was a young man, after he left school. It was an incredibly important service that was provided right across the nation. I know that Peter always felt it was a great honour to fulfil that role. He was rightly made an Officer of the Order of Australia in 1993. I used to ask Peter what he thought kept him so grounded even though he had done so much in his career, and he always said it was growing up in Orbost on a farm as a farmer and as a grazier. That's what kept him grounded. For those of us who have been to Orbost and know Orbost, we know that Orbost would keep you grounded. It's a timber industry town—a lot of milling and also a lot of farming. I've got a very good friend, Kevin Brunt, who grew up in Orbost. His family ran trucking operations there. You also had to be tough to grow up in Orbost; I think that helped Peter Nixon as well. For those of us who know and understand this place, you need a streak of toughness if you are going to survive, and Peter, even though he was a lovely fellow—very friendly, very gentle—did have, underneath, the level of toughness that was required. Peter was also a visionary; we shouldn't forget that. He loved his AFL and the Richmond Football Club but he was also a VFL commissioner and then an AFL commissioner. He served on the VFL Commission and the AFL Commission from 1985 to 1991. You have to remember the change that took place during those six years. They are probably the most significant years that VFL/AFL football has had in the last 50 to 60 years, and that is no exaggeration. What we had before Peter joined was basically the VFL. There had been some attempts to relocate teams and to grow VFL football into a national game, into the AFL that it is today. Between 1985 and 1991 we saw the formation of the Brisbane Bears, the West Coast Eagles and the Adelaide Crows, and the VFL Commission became the AFL Commission—and, really, the rest is history. If you look at the AFL today, that expansion continues. They were difficult times; the Sydney Swans were the pioneers, but to get the Bears established, the Eagles established and then the Crows established—and look not at the Eagles this year but at the success of the Brisbane Lions and the Crows. The AFL continues to grow; we're looking at a team in Tasmania. But it was Peter Nixon and those fellow commissioners, from 1985 to 1991, that put Australian Rules football on the path to being a truly national game. He should also be recognised for his work in doing that post politics. I say to Peter's family: my deepest sympathies are with you and my prayers and thoughts are with you. Know that you are looking at a giant when we remember Peter Nixon—someone who left a huge footprint on this nation not only as a parliamentarian but in everything he did post politics. I am so glad I knew Peter and I'm so glad I was able to have those wonderful conversations with him. It's so pleasing to see the parliament recognise him, as we are. Long may his memory and all that he did for this nation be remembered. Vale, Peter Nixon. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265980 I understand it is the wish of honourable members to signify at this stage their respect and sympathy by rising in their places, and I ask all present to do so. Honourable members having stood in their places— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265980 I thank the Federation Chamber. 17:34 Mr REPACHOLI 298840 Hunter by leave—I move: That further proceedings be conducted in the House. Question agreed to. His Holiness Pope Francis 152 17:34 Mr DAVID SMITH 276714 Bean It is with both sadness and gratitude that I rise today in this place to pay tribute to the life and legacy of one of the great figures of our times, His Holiness Pope Francis. I do so as someone who represents an electorate with a strong and generous Catholic community, and I do so, too, as someone who, while an imperfect Catholic myself, knows the power that faith can have in shaping lives, communities and a better world. I begin this reflection by reflecting that we are in a time of first speeches. Over the last fortnight, this place has been filled with the extraordinary stories of the journeys of new parliamentarians to this place. We have heard stories of struggle, resilience and hope. Elections can well be a time of grief, but they are also times of renewal and hope and opportunity. His Holiness, in his first, brief address—this first leader of the Catholic Church from the Southern Hemisphere and from the Americas—provided a simple message of hope and fraternity, inviting us to join him on 'a journey of brotherhood in love, of mutual trust'. Then, in his first homily, His Holiness spoke of the importance of walking in faith, building faith and professing faith, recognising that this is not easy and that there will always be something pulling us back. There will always be buts, but to truly walk, build and profess takes courage and grace. His Holiness Pope Francis led a papacy which was marked by his unflinching commitment to social justice and peace. He was the first pope from Latin America and, as such, the first pope born and raised outside of Europe since the eighth century. The approach of Pope Francis to his time in office was a marked change from that of some of his predecessors. Where there was once stiff formality, Pope Francis adopted a position of informality. Pope Francis reached for clarity and sought to open the doors of the church to all. Pope Francis in particular sought to be a pope for the poor, the dispossessed and the marginalised. He understood the immense influence his position afforded him and he sought to use that power to help and heal. He was also committed to opening the decision-making process of the church. Pope Francis worked for an expanded role for women and lay people in the life of the church—work which I trust will continue. His commitment to interfaith dialogue and connection was also unshakeable. In particular, the visit of Pope Francis to Indonesia comes to mind. He was also committed to using his role in a way that was both contemporary and relevant to the greatest challenges which face humanity today. His two great encyclicals laid bare the climate crisis and the urgent need for action. But the office of Pope has both a spiritual and a political role. Pope Francis was very much a pope suited to his times. He faced a world marked by conflict, division and crisis. His commitment was to peace, not the peace which follows the absence of conflict but the peace that is a consequence of the presence of justice. He decried that millions of people worldwide continue to suffer from malnutrition, citing armed conflict and climate change, with the resulting national disasters, as key culprits. He said: Mass displacement, in addition to the other effects of global political, economic and military tensions, undermines efforts to ensure that people's living conditions are improved on the basis of their inherent dignity. It bears repeating time and again: poverty, inequalities, lack of access to basic resources such as food, drinking water, health, education, housing, are a serious affront to human dignity! Pope Francis called for peace in every instance of conflict, and he had a particular focus on the violence and suffering in Gaza. As it does all of us, the scale of violence and destruction deeply troubled Pope Francis. He made a daily phone call to Father Gabriel Romanelli of the Holy Family Church, Gaza's only Catholic church. The church had recently been badly damaged in an Israeli strike. I'm drawn to the 2025 Easter message of Pope Francis, essentially his final statement to the world. In his message, Pope Francis drew a powerful link between the hope of Easter and the urgent need for peace and justice around the world. He called for peace in Gaza, saying: … I think of the people of Gaza, and its Christian community in particular, where the terrible conflict continues to cause death and destruction and to create a dramatic and deplorable humanitarian situation. I appeal to the warring parties: call a ceasefire, release the hostages and come to the aid of a starving people that aspires to a future of peace! As we stand here and reflect upon that towering legacy of Pope Francis, it is incumbent on all of us to move beyond mere words. As we witness immense suffering and violence not only in Gaza but around the world, we must turn to the example of Pope Francis. If we truly care about respecting his spiritual leadership and the consequences of that leadership, we need to act on his powerful words and deeds. Let all of us recommit ourselves to bringing the kind of peace Pope Francis reached for, a just and lasting peace, to not only Gaza but to all corners of the world. We can do good and lend a hand. Let our recommitment to the peace be the legacy of Pope Francis, a peace he knew relied on freedom of religion, freedom of thought, freedom of expression and respect for the views of others. Pope Francis invited world leaders to join him and, in his words, 'emerge from the dark night of wars and environmental devastation in order to turn our common future into the dawn of a new and radiant day'. That is the invitation Pope Francis provided to all of us, not just those of the Catholic faith. This is the invitation that we need both courage and grace to accept. 17:42 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina I was deeply honoured, as a Catholic, as a parliamentarian, as an Australian, to be asked to represent the nation and its people at Pope Francis's funeral on Saturday 26 April. I want to thank, from the outset, the Australian Ambassador to the Holy See. He was the Ambassador to the Vatican Designate at the time, as he hadn't presented his credentials because, sadly, the Pope had passed away, but he has since done that with the new Pope, Pope Leo—Keith Pitt, the former member for Hinkler. And I want to also thank the head of mission, the Ambassador of Australia to Italy, Julianne Cowley, for the arrangements they both put in place for the Australian delegation. The delegation comprised the Governor-General, Her ExcellencySam Mostyn, AO; her husband, Simeon Beckett; senior government minister the Hon. Don Farrell; his wife, Nimfa; and myself. In a break from what often happens with papal burials, Pope Francis asked to be buried in a simple wooden casket, something Pope John Paul II also insisted on before he passed away in 2005, when he was 84, after a 26-year papacy, the third longest in history. Pope Francis's casket said much about how he lived his life, and it was a powerful symbolic choice reflecting the very essence of his papacy. The late pope explicitly requested a single zinc-lined wooden coffin, breaking away from the usual opulence of traditional papal burials. Unlike the triple layered coffins often is used in many previous papal funerals—cypress wood sealed in lead and then enclosed in oak—Pope Francis's casket consisted of just one layer of plain, untreated wood, lined with zinc for preservation. Not only was this a departure from ritual but a deliberate spiritual statement: humility in death as in life. The wood bore no gold trim, no ornate embellishments, just a simple cross below which there was Pope Francis's official coat of arms, deeply linked to the Society of Jesus, the religious order to which he belonged. In the centre, the Christogram HIS, the first three letters of Jesus's name in Greek, was visible. This was accompanied by a cross over the central letter and three nails below, all surrounded by a sun. The symbol is the Jesuits traditional emblem, evoking the centrality of Christ and the evangelising mission, and Pope Francis did live his mission. Beneath the Christogram, the coat of arms included an eight-pointed star, representing the Virgin Mary, Mother of the Church, and a spikenard flower, alluding to Saint Joseph. Both were key figures in Pope Francis's spirituality. Below the coat of arms, the ribbon with the motto 'Miserando atque eligendo'—'He looked at him with mercy and chose him'—no doubt summaries Pope Francis's vocation marked by service to the world's most humble. The casket design honoured Francis's lifelong rejection of luxury, echoing his decision to reside in a modest guesthouse rather than the lavish Apostolic Palace during his pontificate. Both in meaning and material, the casket embodied Pope Francis's teachings—people over protocol, service over status. This was Pope Francis. It was not just a vessel but a message to the world that even the most prominent religious figure on Earth bowed to simplicity, reminding everyone spiritual wealth far outweighs worldly possessions. Pope Francis was ordained a priest on 13 December 1969. He was consecrated as a bishop on 27 June 1992. He was created a cardinal by John Paul II on 21 February 2001. He was the 266th pope. He passed away on Easter Monday, 21 April, at 7.35 in the morning in Vatican City. He was aged 88; he was the third oldest pope in history. There are some interesting aspects about his papacy, about his life and about who he was. He served as the visible head of the Roman Catholic Church since 2013 after Benedict XVI announced his resignation. Benedict cited a length of strength of mind and body due to his advanced age. He was the first pope to stand aside since Gregory XII in 1415 and the first without what was termed 'external pressure' since Celestine V in 1294. So Francis came into the role in interesting circumstances. The call to his papacy was made, and he stepped up. And, as we've heard, he did so much good for so many people, but he was the first pope raised outside of Europe since the eighth-century Syrian pope Gregory III. A lot of people have asked me, since my return, what it was like being at the Pope's funeral. It began at 10am. The cardinal who said the mass was Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, 91 years young. He's the Dean of the College of Cardinals. He officiated, and it was a memorable service—14 white-gloved members of the pontifical household, who support ceremonial activities of the Vatican, carried Pope Francis's casket, leading a procession of priests, bishops and red-robed cardinals. It was an unforgettable sight. There in St Peter's Square, a quarter of a million mourners waited in total silence as their cherished former pope arrived for his final mass. You can just imagine a quarter of a million people in the one large place and nothing, just pure, peaceful silence. It was quite amazing. Security was intense, given there were 50 heads of state and 10 monarchs attending. There was a no-fly zone that had been established over Rome. There were a lot of snipers on the roofs and a lot of people with long-lens cameras too. There were 4,000 officers on the ground, counter unmanned aircraft system teams and an air defence guided-missile destroyer off the coast. That said, there was a buzz of official drone cameras over St Peter's, but, at the start, there was just nothing at all. Cardinal Re's homily began a little more than five minutes into the 1¾ hour service, and it lasted not quite 20 minutes, but I counted on at least nine separate occasions during this inspirational address a reverberation of respectful and spontaneous applause, starting at the very back of the square. It rippled its way forward like a wave, becoming louder and louder until it reached the pulpit, and I was not very far from the pulpit—about from here to the member of Hunter away, where the member Hunter sits at the dispatch place opposite. It was not very far at all. I had a third-row seat into an amazing historic event. The first ovation came 11 minutes into the homily, when Cardinal Re spoke of the late pope's first journey to Lampedusa in the Mediterranean Sea, an island that symbolises the tragedy of emigration. Less than a minute later, when Cardinal Re spoke of a mass Pope Francis celebrated on the border between Mexico and the United States, the rapturous clapping resumed. The timing and intensity of that applause, given that the homily was delivered in Latin, was perhaps lost on a certain world leader in a blue suit seated in the front row amongst a sea of black and navy. You don't need to be Einstein to work out who I'm referring to. Cardinal Re said: Faced with the raging wars of recent years, with their inhuman horrors and countless deaths and destruction, Pope Francis incessantly raised his voice, imploring peace and calling for reason and honest negotiation to find possible solutions. War, he said, results in the death of people and the destruction of homes, hospitals and schools. War always leaves the world worse than it was before: It is always a painful and tragic defeat for everyone. The level of influence of the Vatican, a truly global institution, demonstrates once again why Australia's embassy to the Holy See is essential. I thank Mr Pitt for making the arrangements for this visit, and I look forward to seeing his progress in that position. But this is about the pope. Pope Francis left a lasting legacy that we all admire, we all respect and we all love. For a Catholic educated boy from the tiny Riverina village of Marrar—my mother, Eileen, was raised by the Presentation Sisters at Mount Erin, Wagga Wagga, after being orphaned at the tender age of nine, and she lived such a faith filled life, dedicated to the church and its gospel. It was a journey I dedicated to her. I also thank the local bishop at Wagga, Mark Edwards, for sending me to Rome with a lovely cross and some artefacts which I attended the funeral with and made sure I brought home. They will have a special place in either St Michael's Cathedral or the nearby McAlroy House, which is the head of the church in Wagga Wagga. Vale, Pope Francis. 17:51 Mr BURNELL 300129 Spence Today I speak with a heavy heart on behalf of the people of Spence to mark the passing of a truly extraordinary man, His Holiness Pope Francis—a man of deep humility, boundless compassion and unshakable moral courage. Born Jorge Mario Bergoglio in Buenos Aires in 1936, he lived a life of quiet service long before he wore the white robes of the papacy. He worked as a janitor, bouncer and chemist. He lived among the people. He listened to them; he understood them. And that never changed, even when he rose to become the first Jesuit pope, the first from the Southern Hemisphere and the first to take the name Francis. He was inspired by St Francis of Assisi. He chose a path of simplicity and modesty over splendour and of mercy over judgement. He reminded the world that the church is a place welcoming of all people, and, for so many, Catholic or not, Pope Francis was the embodiment of hope—hope for a more inclusive church that welcomes the poor, the displaced, the excluded, the LGBTQ+ community and the forgotten; hope for a world where climate justice and human dignity walk hand in hand; and hope that the ancient and seemingly closed-door institution of the papacy could evolve, not by erasing or bypassing tradition but by reawakening its spirit for the 21st century. His was a papacy of firsts, but, more importantly, it was a papacy of principle. He visited prisons, refugee camps, war zones and slums, not for photo opportunities but to listen to the people. He washed the feet of Muslim migrants and spoke softly to the child refugees. When others offered condemnation, he offered compassion. 'Who am to judge?' he often asked, in one of his most quoted remarks. But it wasn't a shrug with a lack of care; it was an affirmation of humility. In doing so, he cracked open the doors of an ancient institution, letting in light, letting in air and letting in love. I know that many in the electorate of Spence will be grieving his loss, particularly our Catholic community and anyone who looked to Francis as a moral compass, not just as a religious figure but as a man of peace in troubling times. He was a champion for the voiceless when many chose to shout and a friend to those on the margins of society to invite them back in. Pope Francis believed that politics, at its best, was a form of charity—'one of the highest forms of love', he once said. He urged world leaders to govern with tenderness, with wisdom and always with the needs of the poor and struggling at heart. He reminded us time and again that behind every statistic is a soul, and I think that's what made him so powerful in this century of apathy. He listened, he noticed, he cared. He didn't preach from a throne or an ivory tower; he walked among the people and greeted each one the way you would a close friend. It is impossible to capture his full legacy in words, but, if I had to choose one, it would be 'mercy'. In a world that can be so easily turned harsh, defensive and divided, Pope Francis chose mercy time and time again. In his teachings, his actions, and even in his silences, he taught us the strength of tenderness. He showed us that faith is not meant to wall us off from the world but to root us more deeply in its, that true holiness is not about retreat but engagement and that we are never more fully human than when we care for the most vulnerable among us. I hope that legacy is not just remembered but lived by priests, by politicians, by young people seeking purpose, by all of us. It's rare for one person to unite people across faiths, ideologies and borders, but Pope Francis did—not by diluting his message but by returning to its essence: love thy neighbour, feed the hungry, shelter the stranger, clothe the poor, forgive those who have wronged you and, above all else, never forget that each person is made in the image of God. His Holiness lived those words every day not just in Vatican declarations but in quiet acts away from the cameras, in places most of us will never see. And so today we mourn, but we also give thanks for the life of a man who led not from above but from beside; who reminded us that change is not only possible, it is necessary; and who in the twilight of his life still dreamed of a world healed by compassion. Vale, Pope Francis. May you rest in eternal peace. This world is a better place because of your actions. 17:56 Ms PRICE 249308 Durack I rise today to pay my respects following the death of His Holiness Pope Francis and to honour a life of humility, conviction and extraordinary service not only to the Catholic Church but to all of humanity. Pope Francis was the son of Italian immigrants to Argentina and was born in December 1936. He felt called to the church at an early age, entering the Jesuit order in 1958 and being ordained as a priest in 1969. He took his final vows in the Jesuit order in 1973 and subsequently served as superior of the Jesuit province of Argentina until 1979. He later became the Archbishop of Buenos Aires in 1998 and was consecrated as a cardinal in 2001. His humility was well known before his election to the papacy. During a period of economic crisis in Argentina beginning in the late 1990s, Francis lived in a simple downtown apartment rather than the archbishop's residence. He also travelled using public transport or by foot rather than in a chauffeured limousine. He finally became Pope in 2013 following the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI. He was the first South American pope, the first Jesuit pope and the first to take the name Francis. The papacy did not strip Francis of his humility nor his desire to be a champion for the poor. Despite his high office, Pope Francis continued to live simply and frugally and carried out the ethos of Catholic social justice. As the first non-European pope in over a thousand years, he was devoted to the global nature of the church. This was exemplified through His Holiness's visiting nations in our own region, including Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Timor-Leste and Singapore. As Pope, Francis sought to promote unity between Catholics, non-Catholics and non-Christians, as well as act as a voice for peace and conflicts broke out. Pope Francis also sought to address the dark history of sexual abuse within the church through public apologies to survivors and his urging of bishops to reach out to them. As the former leader of the opposition pointed out at the time of his passing, His Holiness, above all else, was driven by Christ's values of mercy and forgiveness. He emphasised those values in his last Christmas address, saying: God's mercy can do all things. It unties every knot; it tears down every wall of division; it dispels hatred and the spirit of revenge. My mother scrimped and saved to provide my siblings and I with a Catholic education in Kalgoorlie. This experience has helped to shape the values I hold dear to this day—those values of service, dignity, discipline, family and care for the vulnerable. These are values that Pope Francis not only preached but lived, and they are deeply embedded in the Catholic community of my own electorate of Durack. According to the most recent census, Catholicism is the largest religious denomination in Durack, with nearly 34,000 believers. The magnificent St Francis Xavier's Cathedral in Geraldton, built in 1916, stands not only as a beacon of spiritual life but as a testament to the resilience, beauty and unity of our region's Catholic community. It draws tourists, locals and parishioners alike, serving as a centrepiece of faith, art and architectural heritage. Designed by the famous monsignor John Hawes, it took 22 years to build—and let me tell you, it is magnificent. I'd like to acknowledge and give thanks to Bishop Morrissey, the Bishop of Geraldton, for his leadership and pastoral care for the needs of our local community members. For those families of faith, Pope Francis passing is not only a global moment of mourning; it is personal. It is a moment of loss—the loss of a spiritual leader who spoke directly to the heart of the everyday believer. These are moments in history we must pause and reflect upon, much like the passing of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, as these are moments that remind us of what dignified leadership looks like. Just as Her Majesty in her final days fulfilled her duty in appointing Liz Truss as the new Prime Minister of Great Britain, Pope Francis defied his doctors' orders to visit inmates of a Roman prison. These actions are emblematic of two lives defined by faith, duty and quiet strength. Both did their duty right to the end, and both served as leaders we should all look up to. Census data makes clear that more Australians are turning away from organised religion. While this may be so, whether you are a person of faith or not, I believe we can all learn from the example of Pope Francis, and may he rest in peace. I'll conclude my remarks by extending my best wishes to the new pontiff, Pope Leo XIV. May he lead with wisdom, compassion and strength as he leads the church in to a new era. I thank the House. 18:02 Ms McBRIDE 248353 Dobell On behalf of my community on the Central Coast of New South Wales, I rise to join others speaking on the condolence motion for Pope Francis and to pay my respects to a man who dedicated his life simply to humble service. Pope Francis was born Jorge Mario Bergoglio on 19 December 1936 in Buenos Aires, Argentina. In 1958, as a young man, he took inspiration from a priest while attending confession and began years of study at his local seminary. In 1969 he was ordained by the archbishop and joined the priesthood. Over the years, he rose through the Catholic Church in South America before assuming the role of archbishop. True to his nature, which the world would come to know years later, Bergoglio undertook significant reforms across the archdiocese to reduce exorbitant spending, instead connecting the church with poor and disadvantaged communities. He regularly celebrated Holy Thursday by washing the feet of people in local jails, hospitals, retirement homes and slums. In 2001, Pope John Paul II made Bergoglio a cardinal. His humble lifestyle meant he spent most of his time in South America, and, unlike many of these fellow cardinals, he would only visit Rome for short periods of time, commonly known in Catholic circles as lightning visits. In 2005, as a cardinal, Bergoglio took part in the papal conclave that elected Pope Benedict XVI. At the time, he himself was considered a frontrunner for the papacy. In 2016, Benedict announced that he would resign—the first pontiff to stand down in 600 years. On 13 March 2013, the papal conclave elected Bergoglio as the Bishop of Rome, the new Pope. Stepping out onto the balcony of St. Peter's Basilica to the celebrations of Catholics across the world, the new Pope would be known as Francis—a name he chose because, like Francis of Assisi, who he honoured, he had a special place in his heart for ministry for the poor, the disenfranchised and those facing injustice. Francis stood on the balcony in white wearing a simple iron cross he'd had for many years, substantially different to the gold worn by his predecessors. Throughout his papacy, Francis brought the Catholic Church into the 21st century, modernising it and opening it up to more believers and people of faith around the world. His ability to connect with people, understand them and offer mercy led to him being respected and revered far beyond followers of the Catholic faith. In my community on the Central Coast of New South Wales, Francis was widely respected for his simple, humble life of service and his approach, through social justice, focused on supporting disadvantaged people and protecting the planet for future generations. Father Raul, on behalf of the Wyong Catholic Parish, said of Pope Francis: 'Remembering a man of God who touched the hearts of millions of the people around the world, a man of deep faith with a unique way of leading the Catholic Church, inspiring even non-Christians and non-believers.' Father Raul goes on: 'He was a man of humility, compassion and mercy, especially for the marginalised and those living on the periphery of society.' He continues: 'One thing that makes him so special as well is when he took the name of Francis, the only pope to do so, because, like Francis of Assisi, he was a man of the poor and he cared so much for the environment.' Lastly: 'He was a man of hope. He encourages each and everyone of us to be pilgrims of hope as he declared this year Jubilee of Hope.' He finishes: 'Who can ever forget this lovely and full life of service to God, born Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who, at the very last moments of his earthly life, wanted to serve God and his people.' My parents raised my brother, sister and I on the teachings of the Catholic Church, and I attended the local Catholic primary school, St Cecilia's in Wyong, and then went on to Mater Dei College and Corpus Christi College—now St Peter's Catholic College in Tuggerah. When my mother, who is on the parish council, contacted Father Raul for some quotes for today, he was offering mass in the local high school. Now, I see my nieces and nephews growing in their faith. My niece, Arna, recently celebrated her first holy communion, and my nephew, Oscar, will have his confirmation tomorrow night. I'm disappointed that I can't be there, but he is taking on the name of John as his confirmation name. As a Catholic, I reflect, today, on the humble life of service of Pope Francis. My godson, Gabriel, sent me today his favourite quote of Pope Francis to share with us: 'Rivers do not drink their own water. Trees do not eat their own fruit. The sun does not shine on itself, and flowers do not spread their fragrance for themselves. Living for others is a rule of nature. We're all born to help each other. No matter how difficult it is, life is good when you are happy but much better when others are happy because of you.' After years of humble service as a priest, bishop, archbishop, cardinal and pope, Francis now rests in eternal life with the Lord. May he rest in everlasting peace. 18:17 Mr JOYCE e5d New England Catholicism—I suppose, Christianity—is a funny thing. As the good Lord said, its two main commandments are to love your god with your whole heart, your whole mind and your whole being and to love your neighbour as yourself—not better than yourself, not less than yourself but as yourself. These speeches, which I rarely do on condolence motions, are incredibly important because of the role of Catholicism and the role of Christianity in the world and what it does. It only took 1,272 years to get to the next pope outside of Europe. Pope Gregory III was from Syria. It was a bit of a long haul, but they finally got there, and not only did they do that but they found themselves the first Jesuit pope. For the record and for my sins, I was educated at secondary school by the Jesuits, and I always found that the Jesuits were a bit like a religious Diogenes. The other side within the big Catholic family of mine was Opus Dei, which is like a religious Friedrich Nietzsche. This form of what Pope Francis took, I believe, to the world is similar to what I saw as the instrumental people in my life. I remember going to morning mass with a gentleman who was an astrophysicist called Father Drake. He really only had one sermon. It was the same, and that's why it resonates with you. People can have glorious orations, but when an incredibly clever person just says the same thing over and over again each time they give a sermon, it sticks in your head. It was basically that airs and false graces are the work of the devil, which is a funny way of saying, 'Don't get full of yourself. Just be humble.' If there's a Jesuit culture, I think it's that. To put it into the Australian lexicon, it's this: be smart; don't act it. Don't act what you aren't, and make sure that you try and inform yourself as best you can, but do not use it to intimidate or belittle others. You'll see it in other people who have been educated by the Jesuits, to be quite frank. Tony Abbott is a classic example of it. He is an incredibly clever person, but he never used it. His machismo at the beach was not his egoism when he was speaking to you. He accepted people and spoke to people on their level, and that was very much the Jesuit ethos. So it was with a great sense of pride that the Jesuits had Pope Francis. Pope Francis had a pretty good run at it. He was born in 1936, so he had a pretty full life. All the way through, his life was one of challenge and success. That's also something that we should gather up and try to apply as best we can to our own lives. It being 1,272 years since Pope Gregory III, he also talked about where the Catholic Church is taking a vital but obvious step: the Catholic Church is moving on from Europe. European Catholicism will be in the minority, if it isn't already. Catholicism is now so vibrant in Africa. Even in my local area, the southern Indian community is incredibly involved. Our priests are from the southern Indian community. There is the Philippine community and, obviously, the South American community. There is Timor-Leste. This is where the church is going. It's strength is growing and growing and the culture of Catholicism is moving. In the past, it was influenced, I suppose, by Ireland and the Italians. It is now moving, to be influenced more by India, the Philippines and Africa. We've had Nigerian priests at home—I'm a practising Catholic; I don't pretend to be a good one. Pope Francis was probably the first step towards that, and now I believe, and I hope, that those steps go on, because that's a good thing. Catholicism, by its very nature, is termed the 'universal church'. It's not the European church. It's not the Irish church. It's not the Italian church. It's the universal church. The pope we have now is another step towards that. He is yet another non-European pope. We do see that there are still vestiges that they hold on to. The heritage of Pope Francis was Italian, so there was still that connection, but the connection and tether is growing more tenuous. That umbilical cord will be cut, and we look forward to a time—although I might not be there—when we have a Philippine or Chinese pope. The Catholic community in China is massive. Most of it is underground, but it is massive. This is where the church will go. You can't stop Christianity, because it offers hope. What it offers is that you put yourself in equivalence with but never above people. You treat people with respect and as though they are on the same level as you. You don't have to treat them as though they are above you; you don't have to treat them as though they are below you. You treat them as though they are on the same level as you. Love your neighbour as you would yourself—not better, not worse. On that evolution of Catholicism, in the past we had a very parochial, partisan Australia, and you never saw that parochialism in a more vibrant form than in my seat of New England. It's not called New England for nothing! She was a tough game! I'm the first Catholic member for New England; it only took 113 years! And even that required a lot of explanation to people. And now I've got a very strong vote; I hope it's not because I'm Catholic! I'm absolutely certain it's not. Just to give you an example, my very good mates, guys I've played footy with—I think football broke the ice—would quite openly say, 'Catholics are not allowed in our house; absolutely not.' If Catholics did go to their houses they'd be going in through the tradesmans door, not the main door. Catholics were not allowed into certain social events and not allowed to be part of certain races or sporting events, and—here's the big one that is part of the unfortunate history of where I live. At the start—this is from people I respect, who'd know the history—when the major properties moved in, the Aboriginals were poisoned out, as were the Catholic settlers. That's part of the unfortunate history of Australia. Things have moved on; that's a great thing for Australia. In the past, the idea that I would be in the National Party and a Catholic was highly, highly unusual. People, when they'd had a few drinks, would mention, 'It's amazing you're a Catholic.' I say that so that people understand the history of Australia and the evolvement of global Catholicism, which works hand in glove with the evolvement of Australian Catholicism. The very important thing about having a condolence motion for Pope Francis is to not make it a wallowing motion for Pope Francis, because he's in heaven; that's the game plan. If you get to heaven, things are all right. If you have a faith and you believe there's something beyond our comprehension, which in our very simple terms we call heaven—if we can't comprehend the power of the Almighty, if we can't comprehend the vastness of the universe, if we can't comprehend the mathematics of how it all sticks together, if we can't comprehend all the complexities that would go into making a leaf, if we can't do it ourselves, then I don't believe we can comprehend God; it is beyond our comprehension. So we come up with very simple terms for very complex outcomes, but in those very complex outcomes resides Pope Francis. I always go for a really simple thing, without getting too deep: if man—or a binary term that we can call everybody—didn't exist, we wouldn't know the universe exists. It would be something that's invisible. Our knowledge of it is the only reason that it exists for any purpose. In that vastness are people trying to explain the spirituality of who we are. A pope is incredibly important. I don't think for one second it's just the Pope that has that understanding; I think anybody who delves deeply into the spiritual inevitably has not a perfect insight—no-one has perfect insight—but a greater insight than others which is always worthwhile to listen to. And a pope, especially someone of this acumen, which he was, as a Jesuit—it's not because he was a Jesuit but because of the culture of the Jesuits to try and get you to advance yourself. For Jesuits, your duty is to get yourself to the highest level not for yourself but to help others; that is why you do it. That's precisely what Pope Francis did; he was a man for others. He advanced himself not for himself, and all the time, in his appearance, he acted with humility; if you do otherwise, you're putting yourself above those you serve. That was a great example to us. I do this out of respect for Pope Francis. I commend the role that a pope has. When you look at it, you say, 'How do you divine what actions you should do, to try and filter out things that sometimes get thrown into, but are not, Christianity and Catholicism?' I think the best way is Matthew 25:35-40, which goes like this. They're saying, 'How do you get to heaven?' He says: For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me. It goes on and it basically says: … whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me. It doesn't say a whole heap of other things—you prostrated yourself on the ground every day and did this or you paraded around. It doesn't talk to a whole range of things that later on get meshed into it. It's quite simple: look after other people. To get to heaven, it's not about you; it's about you looking after other people. Now, why is that important? It is because I believe that's the creed that Pope Francis lived and I believe that's the message he was leaving others. Look after others and, by looking after others and meeting people at their level, not presuming they're above you nor below you—they're at your level—that will put you in the best capacity to have an insight into something that's way beyond your comprehension but exists, which is the Almighty. 18:21 Mr KEOGH 249147 Burt It's my honour to be able to take this opportunity to stand in the parliament to formally express on the record my condolences on the passing of His Holiness Pope Francis. His passing was something mourned by me, my family, by many of my Catholic brothers and sisters across the world and, indeed, by many non-Catholics as well, recognising the important leadership role globally that Pope Francis provided not just as a faith leader for the many Catholics across the globe but also for his moral leadership in many complex issues confronting people of all backgrounds across the earth. Francis's papacy was one clearly of humility, of progress, of fighting corruption and of a love for those that are less fortunate. Indeed, one of the things that really set him apart when he became Pope was the way in which he chose to forgo many of the traditional trappings of the office of the Bishop of Rome. It was through that humility and simplicity that he gained not just love but respect from those across the globe—and not just those of the Catholic faith. Pope Francis compelled us, though, to focus on the common good as a central and unifying principle of our social ethics. He had a compassion that embraced all humanity and he urged all of us to see Christ in our neighbour. That focus on the concept of the common good and on social justice, as a Catholic, is something that I have borne with me not just as a core teaching of the Catholic Church but also as a guiding principle in my engagement with politics. It is something that I think has led me to why I am a member of the Labor Party. Indeed, it's something that I think we have seen in the impact that he had across the globe, being able to talk to and encourage people across the globe to focus on what we have in common with one another and how acting in the common good is in all of our interests. There is a seminal teaching in the Catholic Church from the late 19th century, Rerum novarum, which is probably the most classic exposition of social justice teaching. Regularly, popes have issued their own, similar encyclicals, and Pope Francis issued his in Laudato si'. In it he said many things, but there is one part I want to place on the record as encapsulating that concept of social justice and our shared humanity and the work that it is incumbent on all of us here. He said: 157. Underlying the principle of the common good is respect for the human person as such, endowed with basic and inalienable rights ordered to his or her integral development. It has also to do with the overall welfare of society and the development of a variety of intermediate groups, applying the principle of subsidiarity. …   …   … Society as a whole, and the state in particular, are obliged to defend and promote the common good. It is those concepts that I think leave a lot for all of us in this place as we act as representatives of our communities and act in the interest of the nation as a whole; they can provide us with guidance in the work that we do. For that, we thank him and we recognise his important leadership role not just as a faith leader in the Catholic Church, not just as a head of state on the international stage but as a moral leader across the globe. We acknowledge and we support this condolence motion. May eternal rest be granted to him, O Lord, and the perpetual light shine upon him. May his soul, through the mercy of God, rest in peace. 18:26 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon It's a privilege to stand here today and follow the fine words of all the speakers on this condolence motion for Pope Francis. Pope Francis was the first Jesuit pope, and, as someone who was educated by the Jesuits, I always followed his time in office with a great interest. One of the things that really struck me about Pope Francis was that he truly did practise what he preached. When it comes to those especially who are in positions of power who want to offer spiritual guidance to us all, there is no greater attribute than practising what you preach. On behalf of all the Catholics in Wannon and on behalf of everyone in Wannon, I offer condolences to his family and thank Pope Francis for his service to the world and to the broader Catholic community. I think it's fitting that the first Jesuit pope and first pope from the Americas should come from Argentina and should come from Buenos Aires. For those who've been to Buenos Aires, for those who know and understand Argentina, you know and understand the importance of the Catholic Church to that nation. Growing up in and around that would have given him an extraordinary understanding of the power of Catholicism and the power of spiritual teaching. It also would have given him a very clear understanding of the challenges that still face the globe when it comes to making sure that we spiritually serve those who are well off and those who aren't. The fact that Pope Francis, even when he was in the highest position in the Catholic Church, still deemed it appropriate that he lived in a small unit and that he prepared his own meals said a lot about what he brought to the office. I think it is also incredibly fitting that he always remembered his origins, and that's why he made it part of his responsibility to always be showing, though his leadership, that he knew and understood those origins and the importance of them. We've heard from many speakers of the times when he would wash the feet of those young people who had been incarcerated in and around Rome. It's that sort of messaging that I think is still incredibly important today for the church. When you visit Rome, like you see when you see parts of Buenos Aires, it's very opulent, and you can be left with an impression that this is all about power and wealth. But Pope Francis would have none of that. He knew and understood that proper spiritual teaching was directed, and should be directed, to everyone, especially the most unfortunate and worst off. That is what he saw, that is what he focused on and that's what he knew was very much central to his calling. Pope Francis was identified for his calling by someone who, I think, knew and understood the importance of that and also the importance of the church being a world leader; that was John Paul II, someone who, through his own actions in a very different way, showed the important role the Catholic Church could take. I think he was an incredibly astute judge when he was identified Pope Francis as someone who was deserving of higher office. It is hard to know, but even maybe at that time he knew and understood that Pope Francis would in many ways make a great leader of the Catholic faith. It's an honour to speak on this motion. I conclude as I started: I offer my condolences, my prayers and my thoughts to all Catholics globally, to Pope Francis's family and to everyone that knew him. Most importantly, I offer my condolences to those poor, those underprivileged, those who needed help and support at times of great difficulty and those incarcerated who were touched by Pope Francis. I know he would have left a lasting legacy on them. 18:32 Ms MADELEINE KING 102376 Brand I join with the Prime Minister and other members, including the member for Wannon, with his fine words, in offering condolences to the family and friends of the late Holy Father Pope Francis, the bishop of Rome, and to Catholics right around the world. I was truly sad to hear of the passing of Pope Francis on Easter Monday earlier this year. Pope Francis was the leader of over one billion Catholics around the world. From Argentina, he was the first non-European pontiff for more than a thousand years and the first Pope from the Americas. He was, as has been noted by many before me, the first Jesuit Pope and the first to take the name of the Saint of the Poor, Francis. Pope Francis was born on the exact same day as my mother, Diana Morris. They were at opposite ends of the earth but had a shared faith; they were both from the Southern Hemisphere, though! It was a link that meant a great deal to my mum, as a convert to the Catholic faith later in life before she married my dad. Pope Francis drove important reforms in the church over 12 years, promoting openness and inclusion. Born Jorge Mario Bergoglio in Argentina, he was ordained a priest in 1969 and rose to become the Archbishop of Buenos Aires. He was well loved in Argentina, where he had a well-deserved reputation for humility and compassion. He lived in a simple apartment, cooked his own meals and was known to travel on public transport. His official Vatican biography features his famous quote: 'My people are poor, and I am one of them.' Those words sum up his character and approach to his role as a spiritual and pastoral leader. It was Pope John Paul II who appointed Pope Francis as a cardinal in 2001. In 2005, Pope Francis took part in the conclave that elected Pope Benedict XVI. Following Benedict XVI's resignation due to ill health, Francis was elected Pope on 13 March 2013. As I mentioned before, significantly for Australians, he was the first Jesuit Pope. Many in this place would be very well aware of the role Jesuits have played in shaping our nation through their commitment to education. Indeed, my father, John Morris, was educated by the Jesuits at Stonyhurst College, near Clitheroe in Lancashire, in the United Kingdom, a college established by the Jesuits in 1593, demonstrating their commitment to a Catholic education in Britain—which was a place of not so many Catholics at that time. Teachings of social justice are the basis of Jesuit beliefs but, importantly, with an emphasis on turning those beliefs into action. Jesuits such as Pope Francis view the world through the eyes of the poor and the marginalised. He chose the name Francis, as he said, inspired by the words of his friend Cardinal Claudio Hummes, who said to him, 'Do not forget the poor.' Of Saint Francis of Assisi, Pope Francis said: …he is the man of poverty, the man of peace, the man who loves and protects creation; these days we do not have a very good relationship with creation. It is well acknowledged that Pope Francis adopted a more progressive approach on a number of issues. Pope Francis famously said, when asked about homosexuality: Who am I to judge? It was an important step in a less judgemental and more merciful, forgiving and inclusive Catholic Church. He was renowned for his compassion and humanity. Catholics, like me, around the world will miss Pope Francis, and, of course, we pray for him and his successor, Pope Leo XIV. The passing of Pope Francis and the election of Pope Leo was a sad but hopeful time for the many Catholics right across the country and, of course, in my electorate of Brand. I was deeply honoured to attend mass for Pope Francis at St Mary's Cathedral in Perth—as it happens, where my parents were married in 1959—and also a mass at the church where I bid my mother farewell over two years ago, Our Lady of Lourdes Catholic Parish in Rockingham. Pope Francis's passing and the election of Pope Leo XIV was a significant event for all Catholics across the electorate—those at St Vincent's Catholic Church in Kwinana, St Teresa of Calcutta parish in Baldivis and Saint Bernadette's Catholic Church in Port Kennedy. I joined with parishioners of my local churches in praying for Pope Francis for his eternal rest and for Pope Leo XIV as he leads the Catholic Church into the future. I also want to take this opportunity to acknowledge the work of the former member for Hinkler and former minister for resources, Keith Pitt, who is now serving the Australian community again in his role as Ambassador to the Holy See. Ambassador Pitt joined Governor-General Sam Mostyn, trade minister Don Farrell and the member for Riverina, Michael McCormack, in Rome for the mass to mourn and celebrate the life of Pope Francis. Ambassador Pitt, of course, also hosted and accompanied Prime Minister Anthony Albanese at the inauguration mass of Pope Leo XIV's pontificate in May earlier this year. I do wish the former minister for resources and member for Hinkler all the very best in a very important ambassadorship at a very important time for Catholics right around the world but particularly here, of course, in Australia. Pope Francis lived a life of service, faith and vocation. He taught us to fill our lives with love and love for others. His life was a reminder—and a reminder, always, of my mum—that we should look beyond our material things to seek to improve our community and our world. Pope Francis will be missed. Vale. 18:38 Mr PASIN 240756 Barker I congratulate my colleague for her contribution. It was a fine one. I've oscillated as I've sat here about whether I would make a contribution, and, on balance, I've determined that I will. That reluctance is a product of a couple of things, but, principally—it might not surprise you, given my Italian heritage, that I am a member of the Roman Catholic Church. Like the member for New England, I don't propose to be the model parishioner, but one thing about my faith is that it is deeply personal and something that I don't often share or, indeed, talk about. That's not in a public sense but in a private sense as well. But, on behalf of Catholics living in my electorate of Barker, I think it incumbent on me to make some comments. I appreciate that I'm standing between this chamber and its adjournment, so I'll be relatively brief. My reluctance to speak is probably best described by an experience my sister had, and it perhaps speaks to our familial attitude to religion. My brother was—and indeed all of my siblings were—educated by Marists, but, when it came to going to university college, the only option was a university college run by Jesuit priests. Of course, we've heard the reference to Pope Francis's order. My brother, the eldest in the family, happily accepted into university college and was to be followed, two years later, by my sister, or at least we thought so. It was my sister who was interviewed by the Jesuit priest responsible for the college, and she was asked, 'Angela'—the name of my sister—'can you explain or discuss your relationship with God?' Her response was perhaps not what the Jesuit priest was expecting: 'That's none of your'—expletive—'business.' Understandably, my sister wasn't admitted to the university college and was required to make an application at the nondenominational college down the road, which she was happily accepted into. But Father Overberg, who was the Jesuit priest of the day, learnt his lesson I think. One of the requirements of staying at Aquinas College as it was in North Adelaide at the time—and I say this is as someone who some nine years later went to the college. By that stage, you weren't required to be interviewed—maybe it was the Father Overberg's experience with my sister—but you were required to attend mass on a Sunday morning. There was an incentive to go to mass on Sunday morning because mass was at about 11 and lunch wasn't served until mass was concluded, so you either sat in your room and waited for the kitchen to open or you went to mass and then went to lunch. My sister—dogmatic as she can be—spent all of her first year at university dutifully walking from the nondenominational college to Aquinas College to sit in the front row in the chapel at mass and eyeball Father Overberg. I tell this story simply to say that we in my family like to keep our religious beliefs to ourselves. But, of course, it is important, on behalf of the Catholics of Barker, to make a contribution. Jorge Mario Bergoglio was, of course, the 266th successor of St Peter as the Vicar of Christ and the Bishop of Rome. It's perhaps not a surprise to anyone in this place, certainly not to me, that he took the name of Pope Francis. St Francis of Assisi was an Italian Catholic friar and preacher who founded the Franciscan order. He's known for his love of nature and animals. He's the patron saint of ecology, animals and merchants. He lived a life of poverty and service, emphasising love and compassion for all creatures, and was well known for his humility. I think the most appropriate thing to say about the life of service of Pope Francis is that his beliefs aligned with those of St Francis, and, more than that, he lived them, particularly in the very stark spotlight that is being the Vicar of Christ, the Bishop of Rome and, indeed, the Pope. People in this place understand my particular ideology, and you might not be surprised to learn that it lines up more closely with the predecessor of Pope Francis, Pope Benedict, than Pope Francis—the member's contribution earlier mentioned him being well known for his progressive approach to these things. Having said that, the one quality I absolutely admired in Pope Francis was his humility. His was arguably one of the most important positions globally, yet I'm confident—and there are very many proof points—that, from the young priest who was Bergoglio through to cardinal and to pope, there wasn't a change in attitudes, behaviours, temperaments and these things, and that is an amazing thing. It speaks to his grace. As someone who believes deeply in the importance of humility, particularly given the roles that we have the great privilege of holding, I have to say that his book is one that all of us in this place could take a significant leaf out of. I've often thought that, in politics, hubris is kryptonite. Pope Francis was the most humble of men. As a very young person, I had the privilege of visiting Assisi. I did it in the company of one of my father's cousins, who is himself a Catholic priest living in Italy. He was preaching in Assisi and we had the privilege of accompanying him. Now, Franciscans were in Assisi. I don't remember much—I was very young—but something has always struck me about there being an Australian Franciscan on sabbatical in Assisi. Of course, this was a place of deep reflection and of deep prayer. I'd been warned by my father's uncle that we weren't to speak while on the island, but I couldn't help myself. I was a young lad with a pretty strong Australian accent in a place like Assisi, and one of the Franciscan brothers broke his vow of silence and spoke to me, a young child. I don't recall a single thing from that trip to Italy in the company of my parents, but I can remember that experience like nothing else, and I've always had a fascination with the Franciscan order as a result. I'll make a couple of points. I think it's remarkable that it took the Catholic faith 265 predecessors to land on a pope from the Americas. That's the first thing I think is remarkable. But, more than that, there were 265 predecessors before the Jesuit order, which is such a strong order within the Catholic faith, had one of their number elected at a conclave. I don't know what the Jesuits had done, but they have, of course, now broken that cycle. I just want to conclude by saying that the Franciscan order, and St Francis in particular, is credited with what I think is perhaps one of the most beautiful prayers of the Catholic faith. It is, of course, the prayer for peace, the prayer of St Francis of Assisi. I certainly wasn't planning this but, with the indulgence of my friend opposite and noting that I'm about to conclude my contribution, I might do this in honour of Pope Francis, who, of course, took the name of Francis as pope. Let me recite the prayer of peace: Lord, make me an instrument of Your peace. Where there is hatred, let me sow love; where there is injury, pardon; where there is doubt, faith; where there is despair, hope; where there is darkness, light; where there is sadness, joy. O, Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled as to console; to be understood as to understand; to be loved as to love; For it is in giving that we receive; it is in pardoning that we are pardoned; it is in dying that we are born again to eternal life. Pope Francis lived a life of duty and of service. He did it with the deepest of humility. I offer my condolences and the broader condolences of the people, particularly Catholic parishioners, in my electorate. His was a beautiful funeral, and I wish the 267th Vicar of Christ and Bishop of Rome all the very best as he continues the work and legacy of that long lineage all the way back to St Peter. 18:50 The DEPUTY SPEAKER 298800 I understand it is the wish of honourable members to signify at this stage their respect and sympathy by rising in their places, and I ask all present to do so. Honourable members having stood in their places— 18:51 Ms COKER 263547 Corangamite by leave—I move: That further proceedings be conducted in the House. Question agreed to. Federation Chamber adjourned at 18 : 51