The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Stephen Parry) took the chair at 12:30, read prayers and made an acknowledgement of country.
Pursuant to section 376 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918, the Senate refers to the Court of Disputed Returns the following questions:
(a) whether by reason of section 44(i) of the Constitution, there is a vacancy in the representation of Queensland in the Senate for the place for which Senator Matthew Canavan was returned;
(b) if the answer to question (a) is "yes", by what means and in what manner that vacancy should be filled;
(c) what directions and other orders, if any, should the Court make in order to hear and finally dispose of this reference;
(d) what, if any, orders should be made as to the costs of these proceedings.
Any person who:
(i) is under any acknowledgment of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power, or is a subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or a citizen of a foreign power …
… … …
shall be incapable of being chosen or of sitting as a senator or a member of the House of Representatives.
Any person-
(1) Who has taken an oath or made a declaration or acknowledgment of allegiance … to a Foreign Power, or has done any act whereby he has become a subject or citizen …
… it would seem that s.44(i) relates only to a person who has formally or informally acknowledged allegiance, obedience or adherence to a foreign power and who has not withdrawn or revoked that acknowledgment …
… was to ensure that members of Parliament did not have a split allegiance and were not, as far as possible, subject to any improper influence from foreign governments.
Section 44(i) is concerned to ensure that foreign powers command no allegiance from or obedience by candidates, senators and members of the House of Representatives; it is not concerned with the operation of foreign law that is incapable in fact of creating any sense of duty, or of enforcing any duty, of allegiance or obedience to a foreign power.
… only to cases where the relevant status, rights or privileges have been sought, accepted, asserted or acquiesced in by the person concerned.
… the circumstances in which the foreign nationality was accorded to that person: …
One of the problems is the reversal of the onus of proof. I am concerned it could be followed up by a wide variety of motions which require members of parliament to attest to their propriety without there having been any evidence that they had acted with impropriety. Surely that is not the way for us to proceed in a parliament which, as has been said by previous speakers, members have been required to sign something to say that they have abided by constitutional requirements. In effect, through taking the oath or affirmation when entering this place, they have repeated that assurance that they have been properly elected. This point was reiterated, on behalf of the Labor Party, by Senator Robert Ray:
… it is not unheard of for this chamber to refer a matter of qualification to the Court of Disputed Returns but it always does that on the basis of some evidence—and we do not want to reverse the onus of proof.
It is tedious and it is time consuming, but it is done so that we do not face these particular situations.
The following matters be referred to the Court of Disputed Returns under section 376 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918:
(a) whether by reason of s 44(i), of the Constitution there is a vacancy in the representation of Queensland in the Senate for the place for which Senator Waters was returned;
(b) if the answer to Question (a) is ‘yes’, by what means and in what manner that vacancy should be filled;
(c) if the answer to Question (a) is ‘no’, is there a casual vacancy in the representation of Queensland in the Senate within the meaning of s 15 of the Constitution; and
(d) what directions and other orders, if any, should the Court make in order to hear and finally dispose of this reference.
and
The following matters be referred to the Court of Disputed Returns under section 376 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918:
(a) whether by reason of s 44(i) of the Constitution there is a vacancy in the representation of Western Australia in the Senate for the place for which Senator Ludlam was returned;
(b) if the answer to Question (a) is ‘yes’, by what means and in what manner that vacancy should be filled;
(c) if the answer to Question (a) is ‘no’, is there a casual vacancy in the representation of Western Australia in the Senate within the meaning of s 15 of the Constitution; and
(d) what directions and other orders, if any, should the Court make in order to hear and finally dispose of this reference.
That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent Senator McKim moving a motion to give precedence to a motion relating to deaths in Australia's offshore detention centres on Manus Island and Nauru and the need to evacuate the people there to safety in Australia.
The Senate divided. [13:20]
(The Acting Deputy President—Senator O'Sullivan)
Fair Work Amendment (Corrupting Benefits) Bill 2017
In light of the information provided, the committee makes no further comment on this matter.
From a scrutiny perspective, the committee considers that the offence as currently drafted is overly broad, relying heavily on defences to carve out legitimate transactions, and so may unduly trespass on personal rights and liberties …
The committee requests the Minister's advice as to how each element of the offences in proposed sections 536F and 536G to which strict liability applies are jurisdictional in nature, with reference to the principles set out in the Guide to Framing Commonwealth Offences .
… … …
The committee notes that a person found guilty of an offence under these provisions may be subject to a maximum period of two years imprisonment and/or 500 penalty units.
In this instance, from a scrutiny perspective, the committee does not consider it is appropriate to penalise persons lacking fault and suggests that the application of strict liability be restricted to elements which are jurisdictional in nature …
A number of provisions of the bill leave significant detail to be prescribed in the regulations …
The explanatory memorandum provides limited detail as to why significant matters that set out aspects of the content of offences or civil penalty provisions are left to delegated legislation.
… … …
… significant matters, such as matters that form part of an offence or civil penalty provision, should be included in primary legislation unless a sound justification for the use of delegated legislation is provided.
It is particularly important, from a scrutiny perspective, for the content of an offence to be clear from the offence provision itself, so that the scope and effect of the offence is clear so those who are subject to the offence may readily ascertain their obligations.
I write in response to your letter of 30 May 2017 to Mr Ingmar Taylor SC, Chair of the Law Council's Industrial Law Committee, concerning the Fair Work (Corrupting Benefits) Bill 2017. Your letter summarised certain amendments to the Fair Work (Corrupting Benefits) Bill 2017 which the opposition intends to propose.
You asked the Law Council whether the proposed amendments reflect and are consistent with the submission made by the Law Council of Australia in its written submission to the Senate inquiry.
The Law Council in its submission to the Senate Committee stated that it supported the objective of the Bill, but identified some concerns as to the draft text of the Bill, suggesting amendments be made to ensure that it did not criminalise conduct that was not intended to be caught by the proposed provisions.
The proposed amendments that you summarised in your letter have been considered by the Industrial Law Committee of the Law Council. The Committee advises that the draft amendments summarised in your letter on page one at items 1 to 4 inclusive are consistent with the Law Council's submission to the Senate Committee on the Bill.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if we can be of further assistance.
Yours sincerely
Fiona McLeod SC
President
… inequality – it's actually gotten better.
… become more pronounced particularly in the last five or six years …
… child care costs may be acting to increase inequality …
That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Attorney-General (Senator Brandis) to a question without notice asked by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate (Senator Wong) today relating to inequality in Australia.
The only true and sustainable prosperity is shared prosperity.
For too long, the hardworking and rule-abiding had seen their paychecks shrink or stay the same, while the rule-breakers raked in huge profits and wealth. It made our economy sick and our politics sick, too.
I do think this is a risk. I am wary of the debate degenerating into a zero-sum game where people fight over the spoils rather than increasing the spoils. The market-based system has delivered a lot of good stuff for our country and I have a concern this gets neglected.
That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Employment (Senator Cash) to a question without notice asked by Senator Di Natale today relating to the deaths of asylum seekers.
Our souls … are destroyed under your cruel regime of your of torture and trauma by your offshore detention.
You have the army, the police and all of the necessary manpower and equipment.
Bring them here and we will line up so you can shoot us to end our misery if you want to force us out.
To the Honourable President and members of the Senate in Parliament assembled:
The petition of the undersigned Australian citizens demonstrates that the visit of the Prime Minister of Israel to Australia in this very significant year of 2017, moves the signatories to request that the Australian government take immediate action to move the Australian Embassy, in Israel, from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Your petitioners ask that the Senate:
Takes note of the fact that, as Mr Netanyahu declared in his remarkable visionary speech at the United Nations, Israel is widening the circle of its diplomatic missions and strengthening new ones. Mr Netanyahu sees a new era ahead for his
country - an era Australia could not only move into along with Israel, but could indeed help bring about by cementing this friendship in a significant way.
Understands that while Mr Netanyahu will perhaps not be making an issue about our embassy's location anytime soon, this is an extremely important matter for the Government of Israel - an issue all of Israel, and Jews everywhere, quietly yearn to see addressed. Understands further that were the initiative for such a move to come from the Australian
government, rather than in response to an Israeli complaint or request, the friendship it would reinforce between Australia and Israel would be incomparable, the fruits of it rich.
Takes counsel that, as demonstrated in the outrageous UNESCO resolutions concerning Jerusalem's Temple Mount and the indigenous ancestral burial site of Israel's founding fathers in Hebron, the effort is fierce and unrelenting to de legitimise Israel by disputing the Jews' ancient roots in, and millennia-long ties to, their land. Notes that Australia, as a nation founded on Judeo-Christian values and whose cornerstone is the Bible that upholds Israel's claims to this land, especially to Jerusalem and to the Temple Mount, should desire to unequivocally stand alongside Israel against this, and many other attacks, because of our common origins.
Notes that current initiatives continue to deepen ties between the two countries and, during the tenure of the previous Prime Minister, Australia was exemplary as virtually the only country that refused to try and strong-arm Israel into a "two state solution."
Recognises that Israel is the only country which doesnot have the senior diplomatic representative of the Australian government in its designated capital! This is surely an act of unjustifiable discrimination that Australia could move to amend. Agrees that whilst all other countries with diplomatic representation in Israel maintain their embassies in Tel Aviv, it does not make it right that they do. Even though, after passing UN Resolution 478 ruling null and void Israel's claim to Jerusalem as its capital, the United Nations Security Council called on its member states who had embassies in Jerusalem to withdraw them, there is no law forbidding Australia from moving its embassy to that city.
Holds to the fact that Australia has always had a warm and close relationship with Israel and there is so much more that has gone into this mateship than just the diplomatic aspects, not least the enormous amount of Australian blood shed to
help liberate Israel's historical homeland in World War I, and to keep the Nazis from reaching this land and killing its Jewish population in World War II. 2017 will also mark the sot11 anniversary of the return of the Jews to the cradle of their
nationhood and to their holiest site - the Temple Mount.
These interrelated anniversaries offer a real opportunity for Australia to stand with its mate, Israel, whose legitimate and
historical national claims international organisations - in their so often anti-Semitic attitude towards Israel - are seeking to sever and deny. We humbly pray that these matters are attended to as a matter of urgency.
That the following general business orders of the day be considered on Thursday, 10 August, 2017 at the time for private senators' bills:
No. 42 Competition and Consumer Legislation Amendment (Small Business Access to Justice) Bill 2017;
No. 49 Productivity Commission Amendment (Addressing Inequality) Bill 2017.
That leave of absence be granted to the following senators:
(a) Senator Abetz from 8 August to 10 August 2017, for personal reasons;
(b) Senator Fierravanti-Wells for today and 9 August 2017, on account of parliamentary business;
(c) Senator Ryan from 8 August to 14 September 2017, for personal reasons; and
(d) Senator Scullion for today, for personal reasons.
That leave of absence be granted to Senator Dodson for Tuesday, 8 August and Wednesday, 9 August 2017 for personal reasons.
That the Senate—
(a) notes the release of the report, Indigenous incarceration: Unlock the facts, produced by international accounting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers in collaboration with the Change the Record campaign;
(b) acknowledges the important contribution it makes in highlighting the social and economic benefits of closing the gap on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander incarceration rates;
(c) acknowledges that:
(i) Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander men are 11 times more likely to be incarcerated than the rate of the general male population,
(ii) Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women are 15 times more likely to be incarcerated than the rate of the general female population,
(iii) Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander youth are 25 times more likely to be incarcerated than the rate of non-Indigenous youth, and
(iv) on any given day, there are approximately 10 000 Aboriginal adults, and 500 Aboriginal youth in prison;
(d) acknowledges the growing incarceration rates of our First Peoples is shameful;
(e) notes that the report, Indigenous incarceration: Unlock the facts, calls for justice targets as part of the solution to reduce Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander incarceration;
(f) notes that many other reports, Aboriginal leaders and communities have called for justice targets to be rolled out as part of the approach to reduce Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander incarceration; and
(g) calls on the Federal, state and territory governments to develop and implement justice targets at the first opportunity as part of closing the gap efforts.
That the Senate—
(a) notes the report, Over-represented and overlooked: the crisis of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women's growing over-imprisonment, which was released in May 2017;
(b) acknowledges the harrowing statistics in the report that:
(i) Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women make up only 2 per cent of the adult female population, but 34 per cent of women in prison, and
(ii) some 80 per cent of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women behind bars are mothers; and
(c) asks for Federal leadership to develop a national action plan to address the crisis of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women’s growing over-imprisonment.
Pursuant to standing order 75, I propose that the following matter of public importance be submitted to the Senate for discussion:
The need for the economy to work in the interests of working Australians.
For all their talent at finding instances of "discrimination" and "privilege" in even the most benign of circumstances, Australia's modern left refuses to acknowledge, much less remedy, one of its most powerful and pernicious contemporary examples.
Trade union membership among Australians has been in precipitous decline for the last two decades. Just over 20 years ago, around 40 per cent of Australian workers were members of a trade union.
Today, that figure is just 15 per cent of the total workforce—and a mere 10 per cent of the private sector workforce. Perhaps most ominously for unions, they are failing to cultivate the next generation of workers, with just 6 per cent of employees aged 15-19 signing up.
This is even more remarkable when you consider that major retailers such as Coles and Woolworths—who employ large numbers of people in the 15-19 year old cohort—effectively act as recruitment agents for the Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association (SDA).
The union pays considerable sums to these retail giants, and in exchange they actively encourage their employees to join the SDA, helpfully facilitate the automatic deduction of union fees through their own payroll systems and nominate the union-controlled REST superannuation fund as the default choice for employees.
So, despite the fact that the Australian economy is now more dependent than ever on small businesses competing in a globalised marketplace to drive growth and create jobs, we find ourselves saddled with a workplace relations system that is more centralised, inefficient and inflexible than the one that existed in 1993.
As a result, despite the fact that union membership is at an all-time low, the special privileges our centralised system confers on unions through the Fair Work Commission means they can still claim to negotiate on behalf of some 60 per cent of the total workforce.
I would push back a bit against that very broad sweeping statement that inequality is at a 75-year high, not just because if anything inequality looks like it's been edging downwards since the GFC— (Time expired)
That the Senate take note of the report.
Australian Government response to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services report:
Inquiry into proposals to lift the professional, ethical and education standards in the financial services industry
August 2017
Australian Government Response to the Senate Economics References Committee
Interim report: Personal choice and community impacts: bicycle helmet laws (term of reference d)
May 2017
Introduction
As part of its inquiry into personal choice and community impacts, the Senate Economics References Committee invited submissions addressing a number of specific terms of reference. The Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development made a submission addressing: "The economic and social impact of legislation, policies or Commonwealth guidelines, with particular reference to: d. bicycle helmet laws, including any impact on the health, enjoyment and finances of cyclists and non-cyclists."
In May 2016 the Committee released an interim report on bicycle helmet laws (term of reference d). This is the Australian Government's response to the interim report.
RESPONSES TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendation 1
4.15 The committee recommends that a consistent and comprehensive national data set be established. The data set should provide nationally consistent information on cycling- related injury trends as well as cycling participation rates. The committee recommends that the Department of Health in cooperation with the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development and state and territory counterparts develop the national data set for application across all states and territories.
The Australian Government supports this recommendation in principle.
Although the Government supports the aim of developing more comprehensive data on cycling injury and cycling participation, it is not currently feasible to establish a national data set as described in Recommendation 1. This would require both on-road and off-road injury data, neither of which is currently available as a consistent national collection.
Work is underway through the National Road Safety Action Plan 2015-17 to examine and progress options to improve the measurement and reporting of non-fatal and disabling injury road crashes. A project being carried out through Austroads (the peak organisation of Australasian road transport and traffic agencies) entitled "A national approach to measuring non-fatal crash outcomes" is investigating data linkage of police-reported crash data and hospital admissions data at the national level, and is expected to run until late 2017. Further information about possible sources of road crash serious injury data and the development of a national injury monitoring system is available in Information Sheet 76, "Developing national road safety indicators for injury," published by the Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics (BITRE) in September 2016.
It is known that a large proportion of cycling injuries are not reported to police, even when assistance is sought from a local doctor. The NSW government published a report in September 2015 to investigate linking data from police and hospital records of serious injuries called Serious Injuries in NSW: reporting methodology and results . This report found that 78% of serious injuries to cyclists on NSW roads who were admitted to hospital were not reported to the police. Un-matched cycling injuries are typically those which do not involve a collision with a vehicle. Given the data limitations, a significant investment would be required to establish and maintain a national data set for cycling-related injury trends to capture both on-road and off-road injuries. State and territory governments currently report cycling injuries which occur on public roads, however each jurisdiction defines injuries differently and this data cannot be aggregated. Efforts to develop a national measure of serious injuries from road crashes, through the Austroads project mentioned above, are currently a high priority for the Australian Government.
The Australian Government has recently announced funding for the Australian Trauma Registry, which will in due course provide a source of detailed information about very severely injured cyclists, both from on-road and off-road crashes.
Recommendation 2
4.17 The committee recommends that the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development in cooperation with the Department of Health conduct a national assessment of mandatory bicycle helmet laws once a national data set of sufficient quality has been established. The impact of the Northern Territory legislation should form an important part of the overall assessment. In addition to safety concerns, this assessment should consider the relationship between bicycle helmets and cycling participation rates, drawing on the experience of bike share schemes and other initiatives directed at improving cycling participation rates.
The Australian Government does not support this recommendation.
The Australian Government recognises that there is strong evidence that bicycle helmets are effective in reducing serious head and neck injuries to cyclists. Recently released research from the University of New South Wales further supports the efficacy of bicycle helmet use to mitigate serious head and neck injury in a crash or fall1. A review of 40 studies found that bicycle helmet use reduces the odds of head injury, serious head injury, facial injury and fatal head injury. This research also confirmed that neck injury was rare and not attributed to wearing a bicycle helmet.
The continued application of mandatory bicycle helmet laws is a matter for the individual state and territory governments.
1Olivier, J. & Creighton, P. 2016, Bicycle injuries and helmet use: a systematic review and meta- analysis, International Journal of Epidemiology.
ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS FROM
SENATOR DAVID LEYONHJELM – LIBERAL DEMOCRATIC PARTY
Recommendation 1
Cyclists aged 16 years and over should be exempted from the mandatory helmet road rule when riding in parks, on footpaths and shared/cycle paths and on roads with a speed limit of 50 km/hr or less.
The Australian Government does not support this recommendation, recognising that there is strong evidence that bicycle helmets are effective in reducing serious head and neck injuries to cyclists. The continued application of mandatory bicycle helmet laws and any exemptions is a matter for the individual state and territory governments.
The committee may be interested to note that the ACT Government's Road Safety Action Plan 2016-2020 includes an action to investigate and assess the risk of allowing cycling without helmets in parks, town centres and other low speed environments.
Recommendation 2
As part of this recommendation (and tied to the collection of a comprehensive data set), this should be accompanied by a 24 month evaluation process that includes baseline measurements and data collection so that a reliable assessment can be made which measures the effect and notes any benefits.
The continued application of mandatory bicycle helmet laws and any exemptions is a matter for the individual state and territory governments, as is the evaluation of any trials undertaken.
Recommendation 3
At the conclusion of this evaluation, and subject to its findings, I recommend also exempting cyclists under 16 years from an obligation to wear helmets, while making clear to parents that their responsibility to their children should include serious consideration of wearing one.
The Australian Government does not support this recommendation.
Australian Government response to the Senate Economics References Committee inquiry into Scrutiny of Financial Advice report:
Scrutiny of Financial Advice Part 1 – Land banking: a ticking time bomb
Senate Economics References Committee
Scrutiny of Financial Advice Part 1 Report – Land banking: a ticking time bomb
Government Response
Recommendation 1 (paragraph 8.56-8.57)
The Committee recommends that the Government, in consultation with the states and territories, should strengthen the regulatory framework of the property investment industry to bring it into line with regulations applicable to the financial investment industry. Specific areas include:
• making the regulation of property investment advice a Commonwealth responsibility (recognising that services provided by licensed real estate agents would remain under state and territory regulation);
• inserting a definition of property investment advice into the Corporations Act and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act; and
• requiring that anyone providing property investment advice should hold an Australian Financial Services Licence (with appropriate exceptions).
In respect of the last recommendation, the committee suggests that the independent industry-established standards setting body for financial advisers could set the educational and training requirements for property investment advisers and the code of ethics to which they would subscribe.
– The reforms restrict the terms 'financial planner' and 'financial adviser' to persons authorised to provide personal advice on complex financial products under an Australian Financial Services Licence (AFSL). The legislation will prevent property spruikers from holding themselves out to be financial planners or financial advisers.
– The ACCC can take action under the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (CCA) against conduct in trade or commerce that is misleading or deceptive, unconscionable, or can be viewed as harassment or coercion.
Recommendation Two (paragraph 8.77)
Having regard to recommendation one, the Committee recommends that Consumer Affairs Australia and New Zealand, in its review of the Australian Consumer Law, give serious consideration to:
• the options for reform proposed by the national review project into property spruikers;
• whether investment property advice rightly belongs under the same regime as financial products and financial advice and, if not, how consumer safeguards available to investors in financial products can be replicated for investors in property;
• measures needed to prevent property investment spruikers with demonstrably compromised integrity from continuing to operate in the business;
The Government notes this recommendation.
Recommendation Three (paragraph 8.63)
The Committee recommends that Consumer Affairs Ministers consider the terms of the reference for the review of the Australian Consumer Law with a view to inserting a specific reference to advice on property investment in term of reference no. 1.
Recommendation Four (paragraph 6.26)
The Committee recommends that state and territory governments consider requiring that moneys paid to purchase an option in a land banking scheme be held in trust consistent with the requirements for off-the-plan agreements.
Recommendation Five (paragraph 8.104)
The Committee recommends that ASIC, the ACCC and state and territory regulators have a stronger focus on providing up-to-date and accessible information alerting consumers to risks arising from the activities of spruikers as part of their efforts to improve the financial literacy of Australians and to encourage the early reporting of concerns about property investment seminars and schemes.
Recommendation Six (paragraph 8.90)
The Committee recommends that the Australian Government give due consideration to:
• the characteristics of investment seminars, wealth education programs and similar product sales environments when consulting with stakeholders and conducting consumer testing to rename general advice;
• whether the general advice warning needs to be strengthened to ensure consumers are aware that general advice is not required to meet the higher regulatory obligations applying to personal advice; and
• whether the obligations on those providing general advice should be strengthened in regard to misleading information.
Recommendation Seven (paragraph 5.22)
The Committee recommends that the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner and Legal Services Board (and, where appropriate, other state and territory legal professional bodies) investigate thoroughly the conduct of lawyers involved in providing advice to investors in the land banking schemes considered in this report, as well as those lawyers who provided advice, and controlled trust accounts, for the operators of the schemes.
Recommendation Eight (paragraph 5.23)
The Committee recommends that Consumer Affairs Victoria investigate whether Market First and/or other parties, including lawyers, breached the requirements in the Sale of Land Act 1962 (Vic) in regards to off-the-plan contracts of sale for the Foscari and Veneziane developments
Australian Government response to the Senate Education, Employment and Workplace Relations References Committee report: The shortage of engineering and related employment skills
August 2017
Response
The Australian Government acknowledges the 2012 report: The shortage of engineering and related employment skills, which was relevant at that time, given the rapid growth of infrastructure activity within the resources sector and the consequent demand for engineering based labour into this sector.
A number of recommendations in the 2012 report are in accordance with current Government policy, including supporting education in science, technology, engineering and mathematics and improving trade commencements and completions and these are referenced in Attachment A. The Government will also continue to seek to support all Australian students to have the opportunity to gain the skills for high-wage, high-productivity jobs of the future as well as continue to link Australia to the best talent from overseas to meet our on-going skill needs. This support includes having higher education and vocational education and training (VET) sectors that deliver quality education and skilling, and improve outcomes for students, employers and the economy.
It is worth noting that some recommendations in this report have been overtaken by changed conditions across the Australian economy and other developments. For example, a combination of structural adjustment in manufacturing and a transitioning mining sector, from an investment phase to a production phase, has resulted in the softening of labour demand for some engineering professions and trades.1 These changed labour market arrangements confirm that shortages in engineering are cyclical and not chronic.
Background
On 7 November 2011, the Senate referred issues relating to the shortage of engineering and related employment skills for inquiry. The relevant committee was asked to examine the nexus between the demand for infrastructure delivery and the shortage of appropriate engineering and related employment skills in Australia, with particular reference to:
ATTACHMENT A
1 Occupational skill shortages information – Engineering Professions Australia 2015-16) and Engineering Trades Australia (December quarter 2015) refer, www.employment.gov.au/occupational-skill-shortages-information
That the Senate take note of the document.
That the Senate take note of the report.
We certainly put forward in the tender the benefits that we believed would be forthcoming both to the economic situation in South Australia and in Australia in general, because we would be buying supplies from other places. We certainly talked about the desire from our own research and development of the Australian troops wanting to wear Australian made product.
The point is that these are rarely seen when we start to look at the pricing overseas. They make up about a 25 per cent additional cost on top of whatever your manufacturing costs are.
Export Finance and Insurance Corporation Amendment (Support for Commonwealth Entities) Bill 2017
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
I am delighted to introduce this bill, which includes two important amendments to the Export Finance and Insurance Corporation Act 1991.
The first amendment in this bill will ensure that Commonwealth entities and companies can benefit from the Export Finance and Insurance Corporation's, or Efic's, financing expertise.
Following Efic's provision of services to the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility, we know there is latent demand within the Commonwealth Public Service to leverage Efic's specialist expertise around financing. However, in its current form, the act does not allow Efic to share its expertise within the Australian government.
This amendment unlocks the potential for Efic to provide assistance to Commonwealth entities and companies in the operation and administration of financing programs, when required. Access to Efic's expertise will be on a fee-for-service basis and will be subject to ministerial approval to ensure there are checks and balances. The fee will be compulsory, but must not be such as to amount to taxation.
The second amendment to the Efic Act will enable Efic to better support small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs). SMEs are the engine room of the Australian economy. The majority of Australian exporters are SMEs. Despite this, SMEs traditionally find it more difficult to secure export finance, especially when their target market is an emerging or frontier one.
This is where Efic plays a valuable role. Efic helps Australian SMEs bridge the finance gap when their bank is unable to assist – enabling them to tap into new overseas markets for their products and services and grow their exports. This is great news: more exports means more economic growth, more job opportunities and a better standard of living for all Australians.
This bill further strengthens Efic's focus on supporting Australian SMEs that cannot obtain private sector finance to expand their reach overseas. This focus is paying dividends. During the course of the last financial year, Efic provided 130 SME exporters with over $150 million in funding. However, Efic could do more to help Australian SMEs.
This bill responds to the new ways in which our SMEs are growing Australian exports and expanding their reach overseas. The amendment keeps references in the Efic Act to support for manufacturing and expands the definition of an "eligible export transaction" by adding references to support for tourism operators, online businesses, exporters of intellectual property and other related rights, and businesses engaged in overseas direct investment.
The changes give these businesses the ability to benefit from an Efic loan. Previously, Efic could only provide a guarantee for a loan from another bank for these types of exporters of Australian goods and services. This change will save these businesses time and money by allowing them to borrow directly from Efic.
For example, consider the case of a small charter business running whale-watching tours out of Brisbane or the Gold Coast. The business wanted to increase its capacity to meet the needs of the growing number of international visitors. With its bank unable to help, they approached Efic. However, Efic could not assist under the existing legislation. The changes in this bill will enable Efic to loan to tourism operators like this one, which provide services directly to retail customers.
The amendment does not change Efic's purpose of operating only in the market gap where banks are unable to help, and any support must still be attached to exports. For SME exporters, this proposed amendment is estimated to save up to $12,000 per application by providing Efic the ability to provide a direct loan rather than just a guarantee.
The changes also introduce a legislative stipulation to ensure there are more Australian jobs where Efic supports Australian businesses to expand overseas. I note that it is already Efic policy that applicants for its overseas direct investment financing product must not use it to fund the outsourcing of jobs. The changes will require businesses to certify in writing their reasonable belief that Efic's support for overseas direct investment will result in a net increase in the number of people employed in Australia by their business or an affiliate.
In summary, the changes contained in this bill will benefit a wider range of Australian SMEs, often family-owned, as they seek to export, innovate online, sell intellectual property, expand their reach overseas and grow jobs at home. This bill will ensure Efic remains agile to respond to their financing needs. It will also enable Commonwealth entities and companies to leverage Efic's financing expertise when required. These reforms will make it easier for Efic to support our exporters in their contribution to the growth of Australian jobs and the promotion of trade, tourism and investment.
Excise Tariff Amendment (Tobacco Duty Harmonisation) Bill 2017
Customs Tariff Amendment (Tobacco Duty Harmonisation) Bill 2017
That these bills may proceed without formalities, may be taken together and be now read a first time.
That these bills be now read a second time.
CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT (TOBACCO DUTY HARMONISATION) BILL 2017
This bill will increase the excise equivalent customs duty imposed on roll your own tobacco to align it with the rate applied to cigarettes.
Consistent with the cognate Excise Tariff Amendment (Tobacco Duty Harmonisation) Bill 2017, the rate adjustment will correct a disparity in the tax treatment of cigarettes and roll your own tobacco.
To correct the disparity, this bill will adjust the per kilogram tobacco duty rate to reflect the new assumption that the average cigarette contains 0.7 grams of tobacco and not 0.8 grams of tobacco as applies under the current rate.
This adjustment, to be made over four years, will make sure the Government taxes tobacco more equally, regardless of its form.
Full details of the measure are contained in the explanatory memorandum.
EXCISE TARIFF AMENDMENT (TOBACCO DUTY HARMONISATION) BILL 2017
This Bill will increase the excise imposed on roll your own tobacco to align it with the excise rate applied to cigarettes.
The Bill will phase in the rate adjustment over four years to match the timing of existing excise increases. The first adjustment to the roll your own tobacco excise rate will occur on 1 September 2017.
The rate adjustment will correct a disparity in the treatment of cigarettes and roll your own tobacco. This disparity exists because there are two excise rates that apply to tobacco, a stick rate which is applied to manufactured cigarettes with 0.8 grams or less of tobacco per cigarette and a per kilogram rate which is applied to all other tobacco products, including roll your own tobacco and most cigars.
The stick rate simplifies the taxation of cigarettes and reduces compliance costs. Consequently, cigarettes have excise imposed at the same rate regardless of their tobacco content, as though they contain 0.8 grams in tobacco.
However, the average cigarette contains less than 0.8 grams of tobacco, which means the Government imposes excise on the average cigarette at a higher rate than roll your own tobacco.
To correct this disparity, this Bill will adjust the per kilogram tobacco excise rate to reflect the new assumption that the average cigarette contains 0.7 grams of tobacco.
This adjustment, to be made over four years, will make sure the Government taxes tobacco more equally, regardless of its form.
A cognate Bill, the Customs Tariff Amendment (Tobacco Duty Harmonisation) Bill 2017, will increase the excise equivalent customs duty on roll your own tobacco.
Full details of the measure are contained in the explanatory memorandum.
Australian Education Amendment Bill 2017
Comcare and Seacare Legislation Amendment (Pension Age and Catastrophic Injury) Bill 2017
Copyright Amendment (Disability Access and Other Measures) Bill 2017
Criminal Code Amendment (Protecting Minors Online) Bill 2017
Enhancing Online Safety for Children Amendment Bill 2017
International Monetary Agreements Amendment Bill 2017
Native Title Amendment (Indigenous Land Use Agreements) Bill 2017
Social Services Legislation Amendment (Seasonal Worker Incentives for Jobseekers) Bill 2017
Treasury Laws Amendment (2017 Measures No. 2) Bill 2017
Treasury Laws Amendment (Accelerated Depreciation For Small Business Entities) Bill 2017
Treasury Laws Amendment (Foreign Resident Capital Gains Withholding Payments) Bill 2017
Treasury Laws Amendment (Medicare Levy and Medicare Levy Surcharge) Bill 2017
Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Budget Measures) Bill 2017
Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2017-2018
Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2017-2018
Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2017-2018
Major Bank Levy Bill 2017
Treasury Laws Amendment (Major Bank Levy) Bill 2017
National Vocational Education and Training Regulator Amendment (Annual Registration Charge) Bill 2017
National Vocational Education and Training Regulator (Charges) Amendment (Annual Registration Charge) Bill 2017
Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas Management Legislation Amendment Bill 2017
Superannuation Amendment (PSSAP Membership) Bill 2016
Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Fees Imposition Amendment (Fee Streamlining and Other Measures) Bill 2017
Health Insurance Amendment (National Rural Health Commissioner) Bill 2017
Medicare Guarantee Bill 2017
Medicare Guarantee (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2017
Passports Legislation Amendment (Overseas Travel by Child Sex Offenders) Bill 2017
Social Services Legislation Amendment (Queensland Commission Income Management Regime) Bill 2017
Treasury Laws Amendment (2017 Measures No. 3) Bill 2017
Treasury Laws Amendment (GST Integrity) Bill 2017
Treasury Laws Amendment (GST Low Value Goods) Bill 2017
Australian Education Amendment Bill 2017
Fair Work Amendment (Corrupting Benefits) Bill 2017
Leave out all words after "that", insert:
"the bill be withdrawn and redrafted to provide for the establishment of a national Independent Commission Against Corruption."
It is clear that in many parts of the world constituted by Australian trade union officials, there is room for louts, thugs, bullies, thieves, perjurers, those who threaten violence, errant fiduciaries and organisers of boycotts …
Labor has unsuccessfully attempted to negotiate amendments with the minister. The minister's intransigence and refusal to take heed of the concerns of the Labor Party, the union movement, employers, the Law Council and academics reinforces the view that this government and its minister are driven by ideology as distinct from fair and effective legislation.
The Senate divided. [18:45]
(The Deputy President—Senator Lines)
The Senate divided. [18:52]
(The President—Senator Parry)
(2) Schedule 1, item 3, page 3 (line 21), omit "to act improperly".
(3) Schedule 1, item 3, page 4 (after line 23), at the end of Division 1, add:
536CA Dishonesty
(1) For the purposes of this Part, dishonest means:
(a) dishonest according to the standards of ordinary people; and
(b) known by the defendant to be dishonest according to the standards of ordinary people.
(2) In a prosecution for an offence against this Part, the determination of dishonesty is a matter for the trier of fact.
(4) Schedule 1, item 3, page 4 (line 29), after "defendant", insert "dishonestly".
(5) Schedule 1, item 3, page 5 (lines 9 to 13), omit subparagraphs 536D(1) (b) (i) and (ii), substitute:
(i) in the performance of his or her duties or functions as such an officer or employee; or
(ii) in the exercise of his or her powers or performance of his or her functions under this Act or the Registered Organisations Act; or
(7) Schedule 1, item 3, page 5 (line 25), after "defendant", insert "dishonestly".
(9) Schedule 1, item 3, page 6 (lines 1 to 5), omit subparagraphs 536D(2) (b) (i) and (ii), substitute:
(i) in the performance of his or her duties or functions as such an officer or employee; or
(ii) in the exercise of his or her powers or performance of his or her functions under this Act or the Registered Organisations Act; or
(11) Schedule 1, item 3, page 6 (line 26), omit the heading to subsection 536D(4), substitute:
Giving an advantage which would not be legitimately due
(12) Schedule 1, item 3, page 6 (lines 28 to 30), omit "whether a performance or exercise of duties, functions or powers would be improper, or whether an advantage would not be legitimately due,", substitute "whether an advantage would not be legitimately due".
(13) Schedule 1, item 3, page 6 (line 31), omit the heading to subsection 536D(5).
That Senator Rice replace Senator Xenophon on the Economics References Committee for the committee’s inquiry into the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility, and Senator Xenophon be appointed as a participating member.
I have to hide my sexuality because in this country, like Iran, there are a lot of people—fanatics—whom if they find out anyone is gay they would harass them and maybe even try to kill them.
I have to hide my personality once again. I have to live as someone else.
Sometimes it affects people who have been managing well in life, but are thrown off course by a stressful episode like a relationship break-up, job loss or death or a loved one. This can set off a chain of events that leads to a person being without a place to live.
That photo is a sure way of loosing supporters.
No judgement
Just a observation..
Sadly, you are probably right.
There is no safety and security for us in the town as we have experienced time and time again. We have been beaten up, robbed, humiliated and insulted by locals almost every single day.
We are not going to fight and we are not going to cause any unrest. We are powerless and weak.
Our souls are destroyed under your cruel regime of years of torture and trauma by your offshore detention.
You have the army, the police and all of the necessary manpower and equipment.
Bring them here and we will line up so you can shoot us to end our misery if you want to force us out.
Australian citizens and the world are very well aware of this and they know that PNG will not drink a sip of water without Australia's permission.
You are funding this cruel inhumane system and your money is giving the orders here.
Some of us have children, brothers, sisters, husbands, wives and family in Australia. Our families are heartbroken and devastated from the separation.
We stopped protesting in November 2016, when the Prime Minister promised to free us and allow us to go to USA. We felt the life come back into our blood with just a tiny bit of hope and thought of freedom. We are still not free nine months later! We are more tormented than ever because we were tantalised with a glimpse, and then slowly let down, yet again.
We have been imprisoned for four years on Nauru. We are punished for our patience and good will ...
We are good people. We just want freedom in a country where we belong ... We are human, we want to be responsible for our own lives.
We cannot take this anymore, the lies and false promises are killing us and destroying our minds and souls.
The worst thing is the children are suffering. … You start to see children wandering the streets because the carers have different priorities. … We've got to remember that money is not for the parents or carers—that money belongs to the children and it needs to be spent on health and education.
Tasmania's clean energy, skilled workforce, cool climate and low security risks are already attractive attributes …
But our downfall has always been the cost of data transfer on and off island and inadequate redundancy.
A further increase in the length of blackouts is likely to lead to a total collapse of basic services, including critical functions in the health, water and sanitation sectors …